Obituary

[Capitol Shock II]

I haven't fact checked this but found it interesting. While I am likely to anger up to 50% on this board, I believe that if you receive a government handout you shouldn't be allowed to cast a ballot due to a conflict of interest. Why doesn't someone propose this legislation? They are legislating everything else these days.Obituary - VeryInteresting

In 1887 Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinborough, had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years prior: "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 that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.. >From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse over 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, these nations always progressed through the following sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to complacency; From complacency to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage." The Obituary follows: Born 1776, Died 2012 It doesn't hurt to read this several times. Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law in St. Paul , Minnesota , points out some interesting facts concerning the last Presidential election: Number of States won by: Obama: 19 McCain: 29 Square miles of land won by: Obama: 580,000 McCain: 2,427,000 Population of counties won by: Obama: 127 million McCain: 143 million Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Obama: 13.2 McCain: 2.1 Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory McCain won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of the country. Obama territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in low income tenements and living off various forms of government welfare..." Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the "complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase. If Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty million criminal invaders called illegal's - and they vote - then we can say goodbye to the USA in fewer than five years. If you are in favor of this, then by all means, delete this message. If you are not, then pass this along to help everyone realize just how much is at stake, knowing that apathy is the greatest danger to our freedom.. This is truly scary! Of course we are not a democracy, we are a Constitutional Republic . Someone should point this out to Obama. Of course we know he and too many others pay little attention to The Constitution. There couldn't be more at stake than on Nov 2012. If you are as concerned as I am please pass this along.

[SubGod22]

I haven't fact checked this but found it interesting. While I am likely to anger up to 50% on this board, I believe that if you receive a government handout you shouldn't be allowed to cast a ballot due to a conflict of interest. Why doesn't someone propose this legislation? They are legislating everything else these days.Obituary - VeryInteresting

In 1887 Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinborough, had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years prior: "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 that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.. >From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse over 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, these nations always progressed through the following sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to complacency; From complacency to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage." The Obituary follows: Born 1776, Died 2012 It doesn't hurt to read this several times. Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law in St. Paul , Minnesota , points out some interesting facts concerning the last Presidential election: Number of States won by: Obama: 19 McCain: 29 Square miles of land won by: Obama: 580,000 McCain: 2,427,000 Population of counties won by: Obama: 127 million McCain: 143 million Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Obama: 13.2 McCain: 2.1 Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory McCain won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of the country. Obama territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in low income tenements and living off various forms of government welfare..." Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the "complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase. If Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty million criminal invaders called illegal's - and they vote - then we can say goodbye to the USA in fewer than five years. If you are in favor of this, then by all means, delete this message. If you are not, then pass this along to help everyone realize just how much is at stake, knowing that apathy is the greatest danger to our freedom.. This is truly scary! Of course we are not a democracy, we are a Constitutional Republic . Someone should point this out to Obama. Of course we know he and too many others pay little attention to The Constitution. There couldn't be more at stake than on Nov 2012. If you are as concerned as I am please pass this along.

This should help many on the board read it better. :)

[RoyalShock]

While technically we are a Constitutional Republic, in practice we are an oligarchy and will remain so for as long as the executive and legislative branches do not limit themselves to their expressed Constitutional powers.

As for welfare recipients not getting to vote, I wouldn't go that far. I would, however, consider a system where anyone who receives federal assitance (be it cash assistance, food stamps, tuition grants, etc., basically any assistance that isn't being earned) to a vote that counts for less than a full vote, be it half, two-thirds or three-fourths.

The implementation of such a system would be difficult. The Constitution does not guarantee the right to vote. It only includes the reasons by which someone cannot be denied a vote and who is eligible to vote. The best way - and most difficult - would be through a Constitutional amendment. Any legislation to accomplish it would likely be in constant flux after every change in Congressional power.

Of course, this would only apply to presidential and congressional elections.

[Capitol Shock II]

One half is a start.

[Aargh]

This is an over-simplification, but it illustrates a serious problem our country faces.

Democrats get votes from the lower end of the economic scale. Republicans get votes from the upper end. Both parties strive to have government programs that give money to their constituents. Just because the upper classes don't get direct payments from the government doesn't mean they do not have significant financial benefits from governement policies. If you follow the money, welfare recipients go to McDonald's, Wal-Mart, or Dillons and spend that money, which means it eventually ends up in the hands of the shareholders of those corporations.

Until our two parties start thinking about what's best for the country, and put that ahead of what's best for "their party" or their getting re-elected, or their ability to get really rich after they retire from public service, we're in a downward spiral. Both parties are bleeding the Treasury dry and damaging our ability to borrow money to finance our spending. Those trillions of dollars we're in debt have all been put into our economy in one form or another.

Rught now, the USA does not have the collective wealth or GNP to support the entire population in any form that we would find "acceptable" without borrowing money to pour into the economy. Population control is not on the table - yet. Increasing taxes on the upper classes to provide "acceptable" living conditions for the lower classes is unacceptable and generally counter-productive. Increasing taxes on the bottom end of the economic spectrum only aggravates poverty. Exporting jobs to China and Mexico makes more money for the upper end of the economy, but increases the number of our citizens we consider living in "poverty". I will concede that a lot of Unions have priced themselves out of the market and encouraged the export of their jobs.

The way things are going now, both parties will spend us into bankruptcy so that individual politicians get re-elected. Reagan destroyed Russia by spending them into bankruptcy. Now, we're following that path. Russia broke up into a lot of individul states. We have a perfect pattern for following that example.

[RoyalShock]

I know this will get me on a DHS potential domestic terrorist list, but I'd love to see the central and mid-west states break off and form their own country based on the original US Constitution and selected amendments. Imagine a north-south line starting around Indiana and extending to the western edges of Montana, Wyoming, Colorado and New Mexico (skipping Illinois, of course). Plenty of agriculture and energy along with gulf access for import/export.

I better stop right there. ;)

[SubGod22]

I know this will get me on a DHS potential domestic terrorist list, but I'd love to see the central and mid-west states break off and form their own country based on the original US Constitution and selected amendments. Imagine a north-south line starting around Indiana and extending to the western edges of Montana, Wyoming, Colorado and New Mexico (skipping Illinois, of course). Plenty of agriculture and energy along with gulf access for import/export.

I better stop right there. ;)

As long as Texas is in, I'm for it!

[Kung Wu]

I know this will get me on a DHS potential domestic terrorist list, but I'd love to see the central and mid-west states break off and form their own country based on the original US Constitution and selected amendments. Imagine a north-south line starting around Indiana and extending to the western edges of Montana, Wyoming, Colorado and New Mexico (skipping Illinois, of course). Plenty of agriculture and energy along with gulf access for import/export.

I better stop right there. ;)

Probably have to exclude Colorado as they have been ruined by an extremely large influx of ex-Californians who couldn't afford to live in California, yet want to recreate the cess-pit problem that caused them to flee California in the first place.

[SubGod22]

Probably have to exclude Colorado as they have been ruined by an extremely large influx of ex-Californians who couldn't afford to live in California, yet want to recreate the cess-pit problem that caused them to flee California in the first place.

So how many southern states get involved? Are we counting Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Missouri, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Louisianna, Arkansas Iowa Minnesota, Wisconsin. I don't know how you get to Indiana and skip Illinois unless you plan on taking Tennessee and Kentucky as well. Illinois could just be its own little hell hole of a country.

This kind of reminds me of all the conference realignment talk and trying to piece together conferences and who goes with who. I could have way too much fun with this...

[Anthroshock]

I would, however, consider a system where anyone who receives federal assitance (be it cash assistance, food stamps, tuition grants, etc., basically any assistance that isn't being earned) to a vote that counts for less than a full vote, be it half, two-thirds or three-fourths.

Let's just make it 3/5. If you have any debt the corporation that owns the debts casts the vote. How will this individual count when it comes to taxation? Do the holders of the debt get a write off?

[RoyalShock]

Let's just make it 3/5. If you have any debt the corporation that owns the debts casts the vote. How will this individual count when it comes to taxation? Do the holders of the debt get a write off?

You're making it too complex. That's why I stopped with direct, unearned benefits. I could see excluding the education grants, as at least those monies are purposed. But if you are receiving no-strings-attached cash handouts that originated at the federal level, the conflict of interest reaches a point of cronyism. Ethically, I equate it with direct selling/buying of votes.

[RoyalShock]

So how many southern states get involved? Are we counting Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Missouri, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Louisianna, Arkansas Iowa Minnesota, Wisconsin. I don't know how you get to Indiana and skip Illinois unless you plan on taking Tennessee and Kentucky as well. Illinois could just be its own little hell hole of a country.

This kind of reminds me of all the conference realignment talk and trying to piece together conferences and who goes with who. I could have way too much fun with this...

Texas is the key state (energy, ag, port access).

On 2nd thought, leave Indiana out so they and Illinois can stay with Atlantic Utopia. We'll go ahead and take Kentucky and Tennessee.

I like the idea of going to the Colorado Rockies (mountains, that is), without a passport, but avoiding the Pacific Utopian influence may necessitate leaving them out.

The question is, what do we call our new country? The Independent States of America?

[SubGod22]

Texas is the key state (energy, ag, port access).

On 2nd thought, leave Indiana out so they and Illinois can stay with Atlantic Utopia. We'll go ahead and take Kentucky and Tennessee.

I like the idea of going to the Colorado Rockies (mountains, that is), without a passport, but avoiding the Pacific Utopian influence may necessitate leaving them out.

The question is, what do we call our new country? The Independent States of America?

The name is what always gets me.

Having the Colorado Rockies would be nice, but as has been pointed out, they're seemingly moving farther and farther left and towards the deep end. Poor Utah gets stuck with the Pacific Utopian group though unless we could bring them in through Colorado. Although Cold would be opposed to that as he thinks Utah is full of cultist nutjobs. But I like how we'd sit. Plenty of farm land to take care of food. Port access and plenty of energy. We still share borders with Mexico and Canada without having to deal with going through another country. Not sure if that really matters though. Maybe we could take on Alaska as well. They're not connected to the 48 as is anyway and would offer more energy opportunity.

But what to name it...

[Anthroshock]

You're making it too complex. That's why I stopped with direct, unearned benefits. I could see excluding the education grants, as at least those monies are purposed. But if you are receiving no-strings-attached cash handouts that originated at the federal level, the conflict of interest reaches a point of cronyism. Ethically, I equate it with direct selling/buying of votes.

You suggested 1/2 or 3/4 of a vote. I think that 3/5 of a vote is a good compromise.

I'm not trying to make it complicated, but if an individual takes welfare or assistance and also owes debt, they have no stake in their own life until that debt is paid or the welfare is paid back. In this case they are only working for the debt holder. So the holder of the debt has more interest in governance and should get to cast the 3/5 vote that the debtor is entitled to.

As far as names go, this would be a strongly states rights centric country with very weak federal power. I like Independent States of America, but I also like the idea that none of these states would rule without the consent of the other state. Consensual Independent State of America?

[RoyalShock]

I don't think anyone should get more than 1 vote, otherwise they are literally buying extra direct influence. And that's on top of the millions that lenders already spend on lobbying efforts. But I'm fine with 5/8ths. No sense quibbling over 1/8th of someone's vote!!! :)