Impertinent and presumptive president delivers Ten-Year Plan to Kremlin on the Potomac

Our Fascist in Chief took to the podium in the House of Representatives Tuesday evening and did not so much describe the State of the Union as outline his vision of statism-cum-fascism.

Fascism has been called socialism with a veneer of capitalism. Under fascism private ownership remains, but the state regulates production and pricing and distribution and just about every decision private management and consumers make in a free market. Think ObamaCare. There are still private hospitals and private insurance companies but federal law dictates what they may sell and at what price and to whom.

Obama delivers Ten-Year Plan to Congress (Getty Images)

Obama’s speech was straight from central planning. He should have called it his Ten-Year Plan.

“Last year, wind energy added nearly half of all new power capacity in America,” Obama boasted, while not mentioning that tax credits and federal grants and consumers paying more for power due to state mandates are the only things that made that possible. In a free market, windmills would not be feasible. “So let’s generate even more. Solar energy gets cheaper by the year — let’s drive down costs even further” — displaying an astronomical ignorance of the fact that solar power plants built now will last for decades, all the while producing power at a price three and four times that from natural gas- and coal-fired plants. Once a solar plant is operating, it doesn’t get any cheaper. The ones built five years from now might be cheaper.

Then our Manipulator in Chief outlined a plan to rob from both the private sector and the public sector to pay for his green fantasies. “In fact, much of our new-found energy is drawn from lands and waters that we, the public, own together.” That’s called what, dear reader, collectivism? “So tonight, I propose we use some of our oil and gas revenues to fund an Energy Security Trust that will drive new research and technology to shift our cars and trucks off oil for good.  If a nonpartisan coalition of CEOs and retired generals and admirals can get behind this idea, then so can we.  Let’s take their advice and free our families and businesses from the painful spikes in gas prices we’ve put up with for far too long.”

Central planning will save us from those painful spikes?

Ludwig von Mises dismissed this delusion in 1922:

“The fundamental objection advanced against the practicability of socialism refers to the impossibility of economic calculation. It has been demonstrated in an irrefutable way that a socialist commonwealth would not be in a position to apply economic calculation. Where there are no market prices for the factors of production because they are neither bought nor sold, it is impossible to resort to calculation in planning future action and in determining the result of past action. A socialist management of production would simply not know whether or not what it plans and executes is the most appropriate means to attain the ends sought. It will operate in the dark, as it were. It will squander the scarce factors of production both material and human (labour). Chaos and poverty for all will unavoidably result.”

But Obama and the smart people persist.

“These initiatives in manufacturing, energy, infrastructure, housing — all these things will help entrepreneurs and small business owners expand and create new jobs,” Obama said, being kind enough as to list all the industries the federal bureaucrats are taking over. “But none of it will matter unless we also equip our citizens with the skills and training to fill those jobs.  (Applause.)

“And that has to start at the earliest possible age.  Study after study shows that the sooner a child begins learning, the better he or she does down the road.  But today, fewer than 3 in 10 four year-olds are enrolled in a high-quality preschool program.  Most middle-class parents can’t afford a few hundred bucks a week for a private preschool.  And for poor kids who need help the most, this lack of access to preschool education can shadow them for the rest of their lives.  So tonight, I propose working with states to make high-quality preschool available to every single child in America.  (Applause.)  That’s something we should be able to do.”

The central planners in the unconstitutional Department of Education haven’t been able to do it yet. Since 1965, the department has spent more than $180 billion on Head Start, yet a recent study found it made little or no difference. In fact the study found that children who did not participate in Head Start were more prepared in math skills than those who participated in Head Start.

“Tonight, let’s declare that in the wealthiest nation on Earth,” said the man who knows more than any employer what labor is worth, “no one who works full-time should have to live in poverty, and raise the federal minimum wage to $9.00 an hour.  (Applause.) We should be able to get that done.  (Applause.)” Then, why not $20 an hour? Why not set a minimum wage and a maximum wage. Hell, make them both the same, say $100,000 a year. That is as logical as $9 an hour, a 24 percent increase overnight and a guaranteed job killer.

Carrying on the theme of central planning in anything and everything, Obama said, “We’ll give new tax credits to businesses that hire and invest.”

This is how former UNLV economics professor Murray Rothbard described this kind of hubris:

“There are two and only two ways that any economy can be organized. One is by freedom and voluntary choice — the way of the market. The other is by force and dictation — the way of the State. To those ignorant of economics, it may seem that the way of the market is only anarchic confusion and chaos, while the way of the State constitutes genuine organization and ‘central planning.’ On the contrary, we have seen in this book what an amazing and flexible mechanism the market is for satisfying the wants of all individuals. State operation or intervention is, on the other hand, far less efficient and creates many disruptive and cumulative problems of its own. Moreover, a socialist State, deprived of the real market and its determination of prices for producers’ goods, cannot calculate and can therefore run a productive system only in chaotic fashion. The economics of socialism — a whole branch of economics of its own — can only be touched upon here; suffice it to say that Mises’ demonstration of the impossibility of economic calculation under socialism has never been successfully refuted.”

Obama used the word “investment” six times, meaning taking our money and spending it on what he and his central planners think is best.

Adam Smith in 1776 called this kind of thinking impertinence:

“It is the highest impertinence and presumption, therefore, in kings and ministers to pretend to watch over the economy of private people, and to restrain their expense, either by sumptuary laws, or by prohibiting the importation of foreign luxuries. They are themselves always, and without any exception, the greatest spendthrifts in the society. Let them look well after their own expense, and they may safely trust private people with theirs. If their own extravagance does not ruin the state, that of the subject never will.”

Chuck Asay cartoon

60 comments on “Impertinent and presumptive president delivers Ten-Year Plan to Kremlin on the Potomac

  1. nyp10025 says:

    “Fascist-in-Chief.”

    Sigh. You guys really like to say such things.

    It must of sent a real shiver down your leg to engage in that little bit of transgressive behavior.

  2. nyp10025 says:

    By the way – the color the President’s skin has nothing whatsoever to do with the merits or demerits of his policy proposals.

  3. Transgressive? Hardly. Read the definition of fascism and then read the speech.

    ________________________________

  4. True. His policy proposals are meritless, no matter the color of his skin. It is just odd that his policies do disproportionate harm to a constituent group that overwhelmingly voted for him — youths.

    ________________________________

  5. nyp10025 says:

    The minimum wage is ‘fascist”.

    Dedicating to new energy research a portion of leasehold revenues from exploitation of oil/gas reserves on public lands and the continental shelf is “fascist.”

    Head Start is “fascist.

    Really crazy wingnut stuff. Hateful, too.

    BTW — your definition of “fascism” is bogus. Citing a fellow wingnut source does not count.

  6. nyp10025 says:

    sure – let’s look at the first deininition offered in Wikipedia, from political scientist Roger Griffin: “a genus of political ideology whose mythic core in its various permutations is a palingenetic form of populist ultranationalism”. Griffin describes the ideology as having three core components: “(i) the rebirth myth, (ii) populist ultra-nationalism and (iii) the myth of decadence”.

    then there’s Professor Robert Paxton’s definition: “Paxton sees fascism as “a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion.”

    Lots of other definitions of “fascism.” But, oddly enough, none of them seem to mention proposals to expand early childhood education or investment tax credits for windmills.

  7. See I told you so: “obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victimhood…”

    ________________________________

  8. nyp10025 says:

    I have to break the news to you, Mr. Mitchell – to most Americans who listened to the President’s speech last night — even those who disagree with his policies — the words “obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victimhood” would not come to mind in describing what they heard.

    Calling the President “fascist-in-chief,” asserting that allowing more kids to attend nursery school is something out of Mussolini’s playbook, really diminishes you. It says much more about you than it does the object of your attacks.

    And stay away from the so-called “irony” of an African-American advocating an increase in the minimum wage.

  9. I guess I’m banned from talking about Democrat “Pitchfork” Tillman, too.

    http://www.lvrj.com/opinion/what-would-pitchfork-do-84333892.html

    ________________________________

  10. Vernon Clayson says:

    Obama’s skin color had very much to do with voters, would a gangly relatively young white man with no official publicized record of his past have been elected to senator in Illiniois or president of the US? That was the primary appeal to the minority voters, the liberals and intellectuals, the former a natural reaction, the latter two feel-good votes. He was opportunity for much smarter people, he was placed by them and chances are good even they were surprised that the hand they played, Marxism, by whatever named called, was so quickly successful.

  11. nyp10025 says:

    Assertion that regulation of corporate influence in political campaigns is racist is also a bogus argument, but it has nothing whatsoever to do with the truly deplorable labeling of the President as “fascist in chief” or the assertion that the minimum wage is fascist.

    You know, I remember when the far left used to call Ronald Reagan a fascist and a Nazi. It was stupid and had the effect of diminishing the accusers, not the accused. As in so many other instances, you guys seem to have decided to mirror the very worst habits of the 60s-era radical left.

  12. Steve says:

    Vernon is correct. During the CES I assisted the company setting our booth. A lady from Upstate NY flat told me she voted for Obama because “They both looked presidential but Obama is black” Her words. Not mine. I started trying to discuss some issues like ACA and she then told me “I don’t follow politics, you are depressing me with all this stuff.” Again, her words. The left calls conservatives dumb and ignorant but I am serious, this really happened and I simply cannot make myself believe Obama was voted in by informed voters. I suspected it before CES this year but that nailed it. Because during several of my trips upstate for work I ran into several Obama supporters who no longer support him (or Romney, they didn’t vote this time) because of simple let down of the hope and change thing. Had the Republicans ran a better candidate, Obama would not now be president.

    As for Nyps assertion on the Wikipedia description of fascism, once again its selectively quoted and from the bottom of the page in the source list.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

    Here is a counter snippet and from the main body of the Wikipedia page:

    “Fascism advocates a state-controlled and regulated mixed economy; the principal economic goal of fascism is to achieve autarky to secure national self-sufficiency and independence, through protectionist and interventionist economic policies.[13] It promotes regulated private enterprise and private property contingent whenever beneficial to the nation and state enterprise and state property whenever necessary to protect its interests.[13] Fascism promotes such economics as a Third Alternative to capitalism and Marxism that it regards as obsolete doctrines.”

    WAY different from what Nyp would have us believe and does describe the overly regulatory aspects this president is putting into his very speech let alone his actions. He said it himself, if congress won’t send legislation he will simply order whatever he can get away with.
    Like the doubling of mileage in vehicles, passed by executive order after pushing the companies into it even as they had to negotiate it be an average and they get the ten years to achieve it. Among others in today’s fact checks.
    This stuff supports the feeling our federal government and this president in particular is moving this country in that direction.

  13. Vernon Clayson says:

    nyp bringing Mussolini and Reagan into the debate to make his points is really some convoluted reasoning. “the very worst habits of the 60s-era radical left” was sex, drugs and rock and roll being the guide on for the urchins that now are leaders in politics. There was the anti-war crowd but that was thrown in to add some gravitas to the otherwise hedonistic acts of the individuals involved. The media ennobled them, e.g., Woodstock became a catch phrase for all things wonderful while it was basically an orgy in filth and squalor fueled by drugs and booze, the music was likewise fueled. The nation would be far better off if the 60s had been skipped over.

  14. Vernon Clayson says:

    LBJs “Great Society” was heralded but it was piss ant compared to the current trend to Marxism, by any of its monikers. I grant that his great society was among the middle steps in the movement. LBJ had the decency to not run again when he knew he was a failure, just think, all he had to do was label every misstep and misadventure a success, it works for Obama. Nixon should have said Watergate was a bump in the road and had his minions report that he slept through the incident.

  15. Rincon says:

    Given the connotations associating fascism with Nazi Germany, the technical definition is somewhat useless. Equating Obama with a label associated with Nazi Germany is pretty radical when Obama might pass as a moderate in many European countries or Australia.

    As for the advisability of a minimum wage, I tend to rebel against the notion, but find it difficult to come up with a reasonable alternative.

  16. Fascism is more associated withBenito Mussolini, and is merely control by the state. Acting aghast at the association doesn’t change the facts or the definition.

    ________________________________

  17. nyp10025 says:

    No, no, no. Fascism is not “merely control by the state” — whateve that means. No respected definition of the fascism phenomenon would include such an absurd statement.
    The minimum wage is not “fascist.” Child labor laws are not “fascist.” Requiring factories to install safety equipment to protect their workers is not “fascist.” Requiring automobiles to have seat belts, air bags and catalytic converters is not “fascist.”

    It is (ironically enough) an Orwellian perversion of language to describe governmental regulations in a regulated free-market economy — some of which regulations may or may not be ill-advised — as “fascist.” After all, if fascism consists of proposing expanded early-education programs for disadvanteged children, what term will you use to describe the real thing?

  18. ObamaCare tells insurance companies who to sell their product to and at what price and how much profit they are allowed to make.

    ________________________________

  19. Steve says:

    “Fascism advocates a state-controlled and regulated mixed economy” Wikipedia, Nyp. Your source.

  20. nyp10025 says:

    1. Just about every state in the Union already tells health insurers who to sell their product to and at what price. Look up “community rating.” Fascism!
    2. You are wrong that ObamaCare tells carriers “how much profit they are allowed to make.” Rather, it restricts the combined ratios that carriers can achieve by requiring a rebate if the ratio dips below 75%. But it doesn’t restrict expense ratios, nor does it have any effect on investment income (i.e., the money that insurers make from investing the premiums they receive from their customers.) So you are wrong about restricting profits.
    3. Steve: “Hitler was a vegetarian. Therefore, vegetiarians are like Hitler.”

  21. Steve says:

    Hitler was a Nazi, fascism was secondary in that era. And I thought it was you that hate comparisons to Hitler.
    My post was from YOUR source.

  22. nyp10025 says:

    Nobody but nobody who reads the various Wikipedia definitions of fascism, nor anybody familiar with the scholarly literature on the subject, could reasonably conclude that wanting the government to regulate putatively harmful corporate activity or to internalize externalities constitutes fascism.
    No one.

  23. Steve says:

    As Nyp decrees so shall it be. Much like his lord and savior Barack Obama.

  24. Vernon Clayson says:

    A rose by any other name smells the same, the word fascism is hurled around as bad, but it was a form of government that tried and failed but democracies have failed, the Marxist derived governments have failed, republics have failed. Oddly enough, governments based on religion, where fear is the motivator, remain mostly stable, unless outsiders interfere. Dictators rise claiming power to the people but “power” never means to “empower” them. The nations, their populations and cultures are forever in flux, governments not so much, as the leaders change but their search is always the same, to gain power and pelf. Not one is or has been entirely noble, history merely smoothes out the edges on some and makes raw the others. Nazi has become a curse word but it’s an abbreviation of national socialism, a path this republic is all but on.

  25. Rincon says:

    If the connotations and historic use of a word are irrelevant, am I correct to assume that use of the “N” word is acceptable here because it is merely a term for an ethnic group? Can I use a variety of expletives as well on the same basis?

  26. Steve says:

    Now Rincon, that would be a question for a Nazi!

  27. Use whatever words you like.

    ________________________________

  28. Rincon says:

    In case you’re unsure, my point is that a word’s connotation can be as important as its technical meaning. Given your definition though, do you consider the majority of European leaders to be fascists also? If so, then we can just leave it at that.

  29. nyp10025 says:

    Mr. Mitchell, I’m sure you are acquainted with Orwell’s “Politics and the English Language.” It is such an important essay to me that I actually keep a copy on my iPhone. When I see you casually throwing out epithets like “fascist in chief” to describe a plan to help states expand early childhood education programs, it seems to me that you really ought to re-read that essay.

    So should everyone.

  30. Steve says:

    ” a plan to help states” A variant on the nine most terrifying words liberals have not yet redefined.

    A short list of liberal Orwellian Newspeak:

    discrimination: a word that has lost meaning in the progressive era from over use by the MSM and this administration. To liberals discrimination means not giving equal stuff to members of minorities, who should have whatever they want, and everyone else must pay for those wants.

    diversity: a blend of several unique items coexisting, such as a diversified stock portfolio. Liberals, however, define this word to describe racial, religious, cultural, and other “diversity” promoted within a single society that they define.

    equality: an idea which states that each member of a given group has equal value or equal authority. To liberals it means forced equal outcomes regardless of skill, experience, or effort, as in racial quotas.

    progressive: A “progressive” focuses on using government power to make institutions play by a set of rules. But liberals want to define “the rules.” Are you beginning to see how subtle liberals can be? Does the EPA come to mind?

    prejudice: “Prejudice” means literally to pre-judge. But liberals cannot stop there – they add racial or class or sex or … so as to fit their agenda and change the meaning of the word.

    racist: The MSM and current administration have used this word so much that the word has lost relevance in any honest debate. To liberals it means any person or organization that disagrees with the policies of the current administration.

    rainbow: a “rainbow” is literally a circular color spectrum appearing in the sky due to the result of refraction and multiple reflections of sunlight in droplets of water. Liberals have redefined the word as a symbol of homosexuality. It has also been redefined and used by left-wing political pressure groups to refer to their agenda of multiculturalism. The word has also been mis-used by liberals as a symbol of “diversity.”

    tyranny: tyranny literally means oppressive power exerted by government. This word is not present in the progressive liberal vocabulary.

    union dues: to liberals, union dues means voluntary contributions from individuals who are happy to belong to a union and agree with all actions the union takes. In actuality, it is money coerced from union members as a condition of employment.

  31. nyp10025 says:

    “To liberals discrimination means not giving equal stuff to members of minorities, who should have whatever they want, and everyone else must pay for those wants.”

    You guys still have lots of problems with blacks & latinos, don’t you?

  32. Steve says:

    Nadya Suleman?

  33. Steve says:

    Nyp does not dispute the newspeak, he only calls us “racist”. See above for the newspeak definition.

  34. nyp10025 says:

    It’s all those “minorities” getting “stuff … whatever they want, and everyone else must pay for those wants.”

    I read you loud & clear.

  35. Steve says:

    Its all that name calling at anyone who disagrees with you guys on anything.

    I read you too, loud and clear.

    I guess Nadya Suleman is an honorary minority…

  36. nyp10025 says:

    Nadya Suelman? Isn’t she the OctoMom?

  37. Steve says:

    To quote Nyp from an earlier post on a different thread, “Google it”

  38. nyp10025 says:

    Oh,yeah. That’s her allright.

  39. Yes, Petey, I know the Orwell essay, and that’s why I use precise definitions of words instead of the murky connotations that have been emotionally attached.

    “A man may take a drink because he feels himself to be a failure, and then fail all the more completely because he drinks. It is rather the same thing that is happening to the English language. It becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts.”

    http://www.lvrj.com/opinion/19954449.html?login=y

  40. Steve says:

    Nyp does not want to discuss Angel Adams….

  41. nyp10025 says:

    “In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible. Things like the continuance of British rule in India, the Russian purges and deportations, the dropping of the atom bombs on Japan, can indeed be defended, but only by arguments which are too brutal for most people to face, and which do not square with the professed aims of the political parties. Thus political language has to consist largely of euphemism, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness. Defenseless villages are bombarded from the air, the inhabitants driven out into the countryside, the cattle machine-gunned, the huts set on fire with incendiary bullets: this is called pacification. Millions of peasants are robbed of their farms and sent trudging along the roads with no more than they can carry: this is called transfer of population or rectification of frontiers. People are imprisoned for years without trial, or shot in the back of the neck or sent to die of scurvy in Arctic lumber camps: this is called elimination of unreliable elements. Such phraseology is needed if one wants to name things without calling up mental pictures of them.”

  42. That’s why I don’t use euphemisms like those.

  43. Steve says:

    “Well, I know some people don’t like you to talk about those things, I know that. Some people don’t like you to mention certain things. Some people don’t want you to say this, some people don’t want you to say that. Some people think if you mention some things, they might happen. Some people are really fucking stupid.” George Carlin.

  44. nyp10025 says:

    Tell it like it is, Steve — speak for your more timid conservative bretheren! it’s all about those minorities who get whatever they want from the pockets of the rest of us. The takers vs. the makers.

  45. Steve says:

    “I don’t like words that hide the truth. I don’t like words that conceal reality. I don’t like euphemisms, or euphemistic language. And American English is loaded with euphemisms. Because Americans have a lot of trouble dealing with reality. Americans have trouble facing the truth. So they invent the kind of a soft language to protect themselves from it. And it gets worse with every generation. For some reason, it just keeps getting worse. I’ll give you an example of that. There’s a condition in combat, most people know about it, it’s when a fighting person’s nervous system has been stressed to its absolute peak and maximum, can’t take any more input. The nervous system has either snapped, or is about to snap. In the first World War, that condition was called “shell shock.” Simple, honest, direct language. Two syllables. Shell shock. Almost sounds like the guns themselves. That was seventy years ago. Then a whole generation went by, and the second World War came along. And the very same combat condition was called “battle fatigue.” Four syllables now. Takes a little longer to say, doesn’t seem to hurt as much. “Fatigue” is a nicer word than “shock.” Shell shock. Battle fatigue. Then we had the war in Korea in 1950. Madison Avenue was riding high by that time. And the very same combat condition was called “operational exhaustion.” Hey, we’re up to eight syllables now! And the humanity has been completely squeezed out of the phrase, it’s totally sterile now. Operational exhaustion, sounds like something that might happen to your car! Then, of course, came the war in Vietnam, which has only been over for about sixteen or seventeen years. And thanks to the lies and deceit surrounding that war, I guess it’s no surprise that the very same condition was called “post-traumatic stress disorder.” Still eight syllables, but we’ve added a hyphen! And the pain is completely buried under jargon. “Post-traumatic stress disorder.” I’ll bet you if we’d have still been calling it shell shock, some of those Vietnam veterans might have gotten the attention they needed at the time. I’ll bet you that.” George Carlin.

  46. Steve says:

    Takers and Makers. Two more redefined words.

    Angel Adams is certainly a Maker huh?

  47. Rincon says:

    Nobody likes to answer questions around here. Are most European leaders fascists?

  48. Steve says:

    Don’t really follow European Leaders. I leave that up to their people. I do know some people from France and they used to like Sarkozy but he started doing what he said he would and they voted him out in favor of Hollande who is surprised by some really rich people leaving the country based on his 75% tax rate… declared unconstitutional in December. France is reaping what they sowed.

    Fascist or Socialist, the left certainly does seem to be quick to show the effects of their policies and their adamant denial they caused the results. How about another word altogether, failures.

    http://www.economist.com/news/europe/21571900-elected-left-frances-president-seems-be-veering-towards-centre-which-way-mr

  49. Athos says:

    “Failures” is the word that progressive left can’t stomach. As in Socialism is a proven failure EVERY TIME IT’S TRIED!

    But we’re in the age of Dr. Utopia, now, aren’t we? Where intentions are substituted for actions. But that’s always the way of the left. Don’t judge them on the outcomes, judge them for their intentions!

  50. I don’t know about anyone else, but I’ve not read deeply enough to judge European leaders.

    ________________________________

  51. Rincon says:

    By Athos’ definition of failure, capitalism has failed every time it’s tried also. That’s why the U.S. and the majority of OECD countries today practice socialism, again, by his definition. Truth is, pure capitalism or socialism are both awful. A mix is best, with capitalism being the default wherever practical.

  52. Athos says:

    Wrong AGAIN Rincon. Boy, do you fellas EVER get tired of ignoring the truth? Or is your ideology SO important, that something as silly as reality never prevents you from forging ahead? Or are you just so much better than all the other good little socialist wanna bees?

    Although I was quite young, socialism was amped up in with LBJ’s War on Poverty and the twin bills of Medicare and Welfare that began in 1965. Slow increments of government’s intrusion into our personal business, and the total control thereof, has led us to the current regime of Dr. Utopia.

    Ø is not even pretending to turn the US into a massive collective. THAT is his fundamental transformation. It’s now out in the open for all to see and contrary to the media and you Plouffe boy communists, IT IS NOT A DONE DEAL THAT THIS COUNTRY GOES THE WAY OF A SOCIALIST DUNG HEAP! How do you like that, Rincon??

    Not unless you plan on killing 50 or 60 million of us. But then again, that didn’t stop Uncle Josef Stalin, did it?

  53. Rincon says:

    Take your blood pressure pill, Athos. We want you to stick around. Your definition of failure when applied to Socialism seemed to me to be that most countries that became deeply socialistic either turned into economic basket cases or retreated to some extent as Sweden has done. My point was that the same applies to Capitalism.

    “IT IS NOT A DONE DEAL THAT THIS COUNTRY GOES THE WAY OF A SOCIALIST DUNG HEAP! How do you like that, Rincon??” I do like it, Athos. I woudln’t want that kind of deal. We agree in many things, but choose to explore those areas where we disagree. It wouldn’t be very worthwhile otherwise. Just because I believe that some things should be collective does not mean that I want to see some sort of universal socialism. I would rather discuss specific issues than to paint each other with a broad brush.

  54. Athos says:

    What a superior person you are, Rincon.

    Your Momma must be proud!

  55. […] (Sounds like the theme a certain State of the Union speech.) […]

  56. Hi, the whole thing is going nicely here and
    ofcourse every one is sharing data, that’s really excellent, keep up writing.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s