No response about my statement that unions have disenfranchised the poor?

''Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed. This world in arms is not spending alone. Its spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientist, the hopes of its children.'' -Dwight D. Eisenhower (so what if I did not say the exact quote in the thread here, it meant the same damn thing.)

An Ike also said about this, ''Anyone who would deny a worker their right to join a Union, is a fool.'' Now from your video, you will come back and say I took that out of context.

It matters a lot. Every word is considered in quotes like these. It is important to get them right. I would say Ike is wrong. Let's take nuclear technology for a minute. This technology has saved more lives than it has taken. When you consider all the advances in physics, medicine, space flight, weather prediction, etc., that benefited directly from the nuclear program, you have to conclude the above quote is wrong.



Funny, again I find no such quote from Ike, but it matters not. I am not saying people should not have the right to join a union, I am saying unions disenfranchised the poor. Here you go, learn something:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 7484002896

Oh the IBEW in Mass made their share of mistakes. There were a lot of white paper Wireman working back in the 70s who had their 2000 hours of working in the local in, and weren't taken in. Those white paper people fulfilled their threat, of, ''We are going to screw you.'' Some of them started Interstate... which became one of the largest contractors in New England. That turned out to be a good break for me, for the smaller shop I was at, was used as an example to Interstate workers, and it got me in. But whatever...

Lots of things have been out of control, from all sides, to Unions and Corporations, to Govt and the Fed.

The unions drive the cost of labor up by such things as the minimum wage and closed work areas. How is it morally right to tell someone they cannot work in a shop unless they belong to a union?

People who do not have the skills worth minimum wage are disenfranchised because they will passed over because a company is not in the business of charity. They will find candidates when possible, who at least have the skills worth minimum wage. As a result, you have those with low skills, such as teenagers, minorities, and the handicapped who are now at a severe disadvantage. The unemployment numbers in these groups bear this out. Who is it that is always driving minimum wages up? The unions. It benefits them directly because it eliminates competition. Who is greedy now?

Here is Ike's warning about the giant military industrial complec which we now are enslaved too.

http://youtu.be/WZbinufz3t4

I don't know who first said that ''A standing army has been the bane of liberty since the invention of the sword.'' I do no a lot of the founders feared one, for who ever had said it. My guess would be that it was John Locke, or from his era who said it. But (Gerald?) Rodolph said in 1813, that the old conservative party had a disdain for a standing army, for it being the bane of liberty. And he mentioned that the reason for a militia was to avoid a standing army.

As for back as Toaz, in China, had saw, ''Where armies are quartered, thorns and thistles spring forth. As there is a time for everything, what else he said should be added, ''Ít's good to have a strong military, if you don't use it.''-close enough for most arlonuts

Here is Major General Smedley Butler, who around the late 1930s called all of the wars he fought in rackets for the corporations.

http://youtu.be/F3_EXqJ8f-0

Nothing has changed. The corporations who profited by bombing Libya, and Iraq, are now going to profit from rebuilding all of them.

For some reason Jafo, those 2 General's observations, mean more to me, than your opinion.

And they were war mongers according to your standards..

When I first got in the old timers would say that the 6-7 earned in the 60s was more than the 16 we were earning then. I would hear a lot that the Unions were causing inflation. It wasn't until 5 tears ago when I first started hearing about the Fed, that I saw where the inflation was coming from. As I said lots of things have been out of control. So its time to paraphrase a Rothchild: ''Give workers sound money, and I care not what laws the Govt tries to regulate the life out of them with.''

Hey they brought fruits of repainting, as we call it at the LittleTON VFW.

Have you been sniffing paint??

I think I have put ample sources and even some of what I said was confirmed by things you posted Jafo.

I think the problem here is you really don't understand the argument.

I am not denying the Fed was the problem nor am I saying Milton Friedman was wrong in what caused the depression (in fact I have actively agreed a few times but I guess you did not catch that). I am disagreeing with your hypothesis that it was socialists (it was definitely laissez faire or "free market capitalist who were meddling) and the reason why they meddled (it was greed). I am also saying it was the bankers you said to leave it up to (JP Morgan in particular) who set the system up. If JP had not died maybe things would have been different?

Ummm, yes you have.. You have disagreed with it every step of the way.



The Federal Reserve, regardless of who manned it, is a central planning apparatus. This is a major tenet of Socialism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_ec ... _socialism



It doesn't matter if JP Morgan, or Ron Paul was at the helm, it changes nothing: It is a socialist tool. Just admit it: Socialism has failed every time it is tried..

Well how we repaint at the LittleTON VFW is by saying whoops. But the words of Generals Ike and Butler showed that they brought forth any fruits needed of repainting.

Calling the Capitalistically Privately owned Federal Reserve Socialist, is surely a mix up in definitions of terms.

Oh The Federalist Hamilton loved the 1st Bank of America. Jefferson probably hated it for it was a Central Bank. A second 1 showed up that Jackson, (That Indian killer.) couldn't stand either.

Maybe we should pull a Lincoln and just print our own notes. Kucinich suggest things along that line by fazing out all fiat banking in 10 years. Dennis has thoughts of putting the Fed under the Treasury, which would be better than the other way around as it is now.

The following was posted by Heraclitis on Feb 13

Well, as Milton said, their descendants (because they were gone when Hoover came around) kept the fire burning. They did not act (as Milton would have) because they said the Market needed a good cleaning (and don't forget, they could not loosen the amount of available cash because the law required that they could not devalue the dollar below 40% of the gold standard (as a Ron Paul Supporter another thing you would be proud of)).

Still playing the village idiot I see?


Below is from the Milton Friedman Wiki entry:

Friedman was the main proponent of the monetarist school of economics. He maintained that there is a close and stable association between price inflation and the money supply, mainly that price inflation should be regulated with monetary deflation and price deflation with monetary inflation. He famously quipped that price deflation can be fought by "dropping money out of a helicopter."[33]
Friedman's arguments were designed to counter popular claims that price inflation at the time was the result of increases in the price of oil, or increases in wages: as he wrote,
Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon.
—Milton Friedman, 1963.[34]
Friedman rejected the use of fiscal policy as a tool of demand management; and he held that the government's role in the guidance of the economy should be restricted severely. Friedman wrote extensively on the Great Depression, which he termed the Great Contraction, arguing that it had been caused by an ordinary financial shock whose duration and seriousness were greatly increased by the subsequent contraction of the money supply caused by the misguided policies of the directors of the Federal Reserve.
The Fed was largely responsible for converting what might have been a garden-variety recession, although perhaps a fairly severe one, into a major catastrophe. Instead of using its powers to offset the depression, it presided over a decline in the quantity of money by one-third from 1929 to 1933 ... Far from the depression being a failure of the free-enterprise system, it was a tragic failure of government.
—Milton Friedman, Two Lucky People, 233

So Milton was a socialist?

More Socialist Milton Friedman below:

Friedman was the main proponent of the monetarist school of economics. He maintained that there is a close and stable association between price inflation and the money supply, mainly that price inflation should be regulated with monetary deflation and price deflation with monetary inflation. He famously quipped that price deflation can be fought by "dropping money out of a helicopter.

(Note: should be regulated ... I know your village idiot phenomenon so a put the special bit in bold)

This is funny

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEElA5b4AkM