Who's Job is it?

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

ronny

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Sep 7, 2009
Messages
6,207
Reaction score
957
Location
Ardmore
I haven't bothered reading three pages of responses, so forgive me if I repeat something.

You almost asked the right question. The real question is "why do you even need any protection?". I've always been fascinated by our system of government with it's basis of checks and balances. The Executive, Legislative and Judicial arms working both in unison and opposition to achieve the intended result of the best government in the world, ever. Our Founding Fathers were brilliant in their conception and construction of this system.

Only one problem. This system requires that it's members play by the rules. For the better part of 200 years, this largely happened. At least, when someone broke the rules, the system (and the honest people in it) reined them in. But then something happened. Someone with the intent of achieving complete power realized that there is no real check and balance if two of the three branches can be controlled, even to a small degree.

Without belaboring the point, we now have a situation where the Executive branch, 1/2 the Legislative branch and, arguably, 4/9 of the Judicial are either controlled by, or heavily influenced by, one group. Even that would constitute "checks and balances", all other things being equal. However, the Legislative branch has simply been gutted. Party, or more specifically ideology, now means everything. The Executive rules by fiat, which allows it to "regulate" law. The Legislative allows this by failing to exercise the powers given it by law. For all practical purposes, the Executive has come to realize there is no one to rein it in, and, so, it does what it wants as quickly as possible to solidify it's hold on power.

To answer your question - "No One!". To answer mine - "Because we allowed it!". We can be broken up into two groups. One group is that one that now asks these questions, including "What the hell just happened?". The other group is one that benefits greatly, at least in the short run, from fruits of the current crop of programs and supposed entitlements. The second group is led by the nose to the trough (and votes) and the first group sits on it's hands and asks "Why?".
 

LightningCrash

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Jul 31, 2008
Messages
11,886
Reaction score
105
Location
OKC
Yeah I didn't have anything given to me, I just had the taxpayers held at gunpoint to loan me $100,000 for 6 years of college.

Lurker66 you are beneath me on the scale of "earning" things. You inherited your wealth while I earned everything myself.
 

Hoov

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Oct 4, 2005
Messages
4,541
Reaction score
304
Location
Okc
Lurker, I am not criticizing your wealth. I, however, do not agree with your earlier statements in this context as they seem hypocritical. You overheard a conversation. That is how a free market works, which you seem to abhor. Nothing personal, I just disagree with your opinion.
 

WTJ

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Mar 6, 2009
Messages
3,719
Reaction score
0
Location
ORG/BPT/CWF
I missed something here I think. Either the .gov is 'influenced' (more like owned since the Wilson era) by the "corporations", OR, the .gov is here to protect us against the "corporations". Which?

Governments are owned by the Central Bank these days. Neither party is interested in your list, except to the extent that we serfs remain calm.
 

criticalbass

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Jun 11, 2006
Messages
5,596
Reaction score
7
Location
OKC
Based on the reviews I've read, The movie strays from the Biblical story. Who's Job? WHOSE Job? I will not engage in this guessing game. The scripture is plain and simple. I feel that this is a Hollywood conspiracy to undermine the truth. I will NOT be seeing this movie. Nice try, Hollywood.

Who's Job? A guy whose patience would have been tried by this thread. I think Hench's post says it best for me.
 

Lurker66

Sharpshooter
Joined
Aug 14, 2012
Messages
9,332
Reaction score
7
Location
Pink
That was a pretty huge break, you inherited the foundation of you wealth. Nothing wrong with that, but not quite the same as earning it. The rest of us are using this capitalistic market to earn an honest middle class living by trading skills or goods for money.

Just think, if we were a socialists society, you would still be working for a living while I enjoyed your inheritance.

A huge break? Not really, I had a lot of competition for my wife. Anyone could have married her, but she chose me or we chose each other.

Lots of people inherit land, farmers for example. Some land has been owned by the same family for generations. Did they "earn" it? Do wives "earn" what they inherit from their husbands? Did or will your wife, kids or grand kids benefit from your hard work? Should they?

Your argument also sounds like Obama's statement; "you didn't build it". I took some land that was given to me, and because I wasn't a farmer and didn't want to live in PA, sold it. At the time I sold the land, I was working 2 full time jobs and 1 part time job. No, I earned every cent honestly and I worked very hard at being an honest guy. My father in law recognized my work ethic, my morals, my values and my personality, all of which I worked on and developed through my life experiences. I came from poverty and received a break but anyone could have gotten the same break.

Maybe your right, maybe I didn't earn anything and was just given a foundation(land). America, the land of opportunity, and I made the best of it.
 

Lurker66

Sharpshooter
Joined
Aug 14, 2012
Messages
9,332
Reaction score
7
Location
Pink
Lurker, I am not criticizing your wealth. I, however, do not agree with your earlier statements in this context as they seem hypocritical. You overheard a conversation. That is how a free market works, which you seem to abhor. Nothing personal, I just disagree with your opinion.

Of course your not gonna criticize my wealth. And you didn't just disagree with my statements. You posted in this thread just a few times, You asked me some questions, you trolled me and I responded. YOU asked, I answered. I asked and you just ask more questions. You asked if I want wine with my cheese, you offered me old Econ books, you question how I made my money. All as if you "know" or have "the" answer. You haven't said ****. No argument, no opinion, nothing that says you know anything about making money other than offer some old Econ books.

What's your credentials? Why should anyone listen to your opinion? Do you have some schooling or personal experience that makes your opinion better than mine? Do you work in finances? I'm guessing you do and that's why you don't want to answer my question "Are you drawing a check?".

If you want to debate or argue about finances, economy, open markets or closed markets cool but please bring something to the table. Until then your horse **** comments are just that.
 

Shadowrider

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Jan 28, 2008
Messages
21,573
Reaction score
9,414
Location
Tornado Alley
I haven't bothered reading three pages of responses, so forgive me if I repeat something.

You almost asked the right question. The real question is "why do you even need any protection?". I've always been fascinated by our system of government with it's basis of checks and balances. The Executive, Legislative and Judicial arms working both in unison and opposition to achieve the intended result of the best government in the world, ever. Our Founding Fathers were brilliant in their conception and construction of this system.

Only one problem. This system requires that it's members play by the rules. For the better part of 200 years, this largely happened. At least, when someone broke the rules, the system (and the honest people in it) reined them in. But then something happened. Someone with the intent of achieving complete power realized that there is no real check and balance if two of the three branches can be controlled, even to a small degree.

Without belaboring the point, we now have a situation where the Executive branch, 1/2 the Legislative branch and, arguably, 4/9 of the Judicial are either controlled by, or heavily influenced by, one group. Even that would constitute "checks and balances", all other things being equal. However, the Legislative branch has simply been gutted. Party, or more specifically ideology, now means everything. The Executive rules by fiat, which allows it to "regulate" law. The Legislative allows this by failing to exercise the powers given it by law. For all practical purposes, the Executive has come to realize there is no one to rein it in, and, so, it does what it wants as quickly as possible to solidify it's hold on power.

To answer your question - "No One!". To answer mine - "Because we allowed it!". We can be broken up into two groups. One group is that one that now asks these questions, including "What the hell just happened?". The other group is one that benefits greatly, at least in the short run, from fruits of the current crop of programs and supposed entitlements. The second group is led by the nose to the trough (and votes) and the first group sits on it's hands and asks "Why?".


Outstanding summation!

BRAVO! :yelclap:
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom