The lies of our Socialists running for office will now take center stage

johnwk2 · 2019-08-20T11:29:29.992Z

Optrader:

johnwk2:

Optrader:

Sure, let’s destroy our entire economy on a liberal feel good experiment, except rich Liberals won’t feel the pain, only everyone else will…

That is what federal capitalism is about. It is about allowing our federal government to make liberal preferences and invest our tax dollars, especially in social experiments and areas not authorized by our written Constitution. And the only ones who seem to profit in these ventures are the politically well connected.

Our founders never intended to allow our federal government to engage in capitalism and invest federal revenue to promote, e.g., science or useful arts.

In fact our Constitution states in crystal clear language, Congress shall have power “To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts . . . ” with a very specific limitation which is “. . . by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.”

Our founder never intended, nor did they by the wording of our Constitution, grant power to Congress to engage in capitalism and invest tax revenue beyond the list of specifications found beneath Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1. In fact, one of our forefathers confirms this as follows:

"The framers of the Constitution guarded so much against a possibility of such partial preferences as might be given, if Congress had the right to grant them, that, even to encourage learning and useful arts, the granting of patents is the extent of their power. And surely nothing could be less dangerous to the sovereignty or interest of the individual States than the encouragement which might be given to ingenious inventors or promoters of valuable inventions in the arts and sciences. The encouragement which the General Government might give to the fine arts, to commerce, to manufactures, and agriculture, might, if judiciously applied, redound to the honor of Congress, and the splendor, magnificence, and real advantage of the United States; but the wise framers of our Constitution saw that, if Congress had the power of exerting what has been called a royal munificence for these purposes, Congress might, like many royal benefactors, misplace their munificence; might elevate sycophants, and be inattentive to men unfriendly to the views of Government; might reward the ingenuity of the citizens of one State, and neglect a much greater genius of another. A citizen of a powerful State it might be said, was attended to, whilst that of one of less weight in the Federal scale was totally neglected. It is not sufficient, to remove these objections, to say, as some gentlemen have said, that Congress in incapable of partiality or absurdities, and that they are as far from committing them as my colleagues or myself. I tell them the Constitution was formed on a supposition of human frailty, and to restrain abuses of mistaken powers.” See: Annals of Congress Feb 7th,1792 Representative Page

So why is our federal government allowed to get away with interfering with a free market, free enterprise system which our Constitution was designed to protect? Why is Congress allowed to engage in capitalism by "investing’ our federal tax revenue for countless causes and objectives not authorized by our Constitution, which in turn obstructs and interferes with individual enterprise? Could it be that a clever use of language, which nefariously and falsely presumes “capitalism”, in all its forms and all its practices, is indistinguishable from a free market, free enterprise system?

JWK

The Federal Reserve System of 1913 and the Sixteenth Amendment, also of 1913, have provided the necessary tools to folks in government to spread the evil tentacles of democratic capitalism into almost every corner of our once free market, free enterprise system.

You don’t have to convince me John, that our government does A LOT of things our founders never intended. But, government interference is now accepted, and unfortunately expected by each party as it comes to power.

I really don’t know how it could ever be fixed. Term limits in Congress and Senate would be a good place to start on many problems, but the lawmakers will never pass laws detrimental to themselves. The irony that the people stealing our tax money and wasting it, are the same people who get to pass laws declaring that what they’re doing isn’t theft, is lost on most Americans and especially Liberals. Their view is that more theft is better because everyone except themselves is too stupid and greedy to use their money wisely anyway… The average liberal hasn’t learned from history that socialism can not ever work. They’re being taught the opposite. Their leaders know it though, and are pushing hard for young people to over ride common sense and vote for it anyway, which they eventually will…

I could be wrong but your above comment seems to indicate you have resigned yourself to accepting outright theft taking place via federal capitalism, and even accept and expect it. Additionally, you seem to be more upset with our “liberal” legislators practicing federal capitalism, that ”Their view is that more theft is better because everyone except themselves is too stupid and greedy to use their money wisely anyway… The average liberal hasn’t learned from history that socialism can not ever work.”

I think it is a mistake of our [the people’s] own doing to accept and expect the evil consequences of federal capitalism . . . and regardless of which legislators engage in the practice. The above quote I provided from Representative Page is frighteningly accurate, and portrays the very evils we, the people, now experience ___ evils put upon the people by both political party leaderships ___ as they act in concert to plunder our federal treasury. What good is it to have a constitution, one which was intentionally designed to control and limit those we elect, if its provisions can, with impunity, be set aside by the very principals intended to be control and limited by it?

Of course, we were amply warned about submitting to such tyranny!

“When a free people submit to oppressive acts, passed in violation of their constitution, for a single day, they have thrown down the palladium of their liberty. Submit to despotism for an hour and you concede the principle. John Adams said, in 1775, Nip the shoots of arbitrary power in the bud. It is the only thing a people determined to be free can do. Republics have often failed, and have been succeeded by the most revolting despotisms; and always it was the voice of timidity, cowardice, or false leaders counseling submission, that led to the final downfall of freedom. It was the cowardice and treachery of the Senate of Rome that allowed the usurper to gain power, inch by inch, to overthrow the Republic. The history of the downfall of Republics is the same in all ages. The first inch that is yielded to despotism __ the first blow, dealt at the Constitution, that is not resisted is the beginning of the end of the nation’s ruin.” ___ THE OLD GUARD, A MONTHLY JOURNAL DEVOTED TO THE PRINCIPLES OF 1776 AND 1787.

How do we fix the problem? Perhaps that “fix’ begins with ordinary people joining together to preserve and protect our written Constitution, and rising up by the tens of thousands to condemn the leaderships of both political parties when they knowingly and willingly join to subvert our Constitution and engage in federal capitalism intentionally designed to fatten their own fortunes, and those of their friends.

I believe the good people of Puerto Rico have set an example which the good people of the United States need to learn.

JWK

The Federal Reserve System of 1913 and the Sixteenth Amendment, also of 1913, have provided the necessary tools to folks in government to spread the evil tentacles of democratic capitalism into almost every corner of our once free market, free enterprise system.

Optrader · 2019-08-20T13:55:40.264Z

johnwk2:

fallenturtle:

Not really… what you described is closer to social democracy except for the ■■■■■■■■ conspiratorial part.

Actually, it is more accurately described as federal capitalism . . . an investment of federal capital, by Congress, to achieve a stated goal.

JWK

The Federal Reserve System of 1913 and the Sixteenth Amendment, also of 1913, have provided the necessary tools to folks in government to spread the evil tentacles of democratic capitalism into almost every corner of our once free market, free enterprise system.

The issue I have with this is that the Federal Government has no capital of its own to invest. All the money the government has is from revenue generated by taxes. The government is just acting as a single agent and “investing” (supposedly) the money owned commonly by the people for the common good, this is the “common regulation” aspect of Socialism. The government is regulated by the common will of the people.

But, I see and concede your point too. Yes, the government is using money for specific things to achieve specific goals, which is capitalism, but then wouldn’t that definition make everything the government does with money make our government capitalists?

I think intent and result make the biggest practical difference in the opposing views of liberals and conservatives on the role of government. One view believes the good of the individual is more important, the other believes the good of the masses is more important and both use the government to the greatest extent they can to bring their views about.

The government can be either or both and they don’t care. They get rich and stay in power either way

Optrader · 2019-08-20T14:14:00.371Z

johnwk2:

Optrader:

johnwk2:

Optrader:

Sure, let’s destroy our entire economy on a liberal feel good experiment, except rich Liberals won’t feel the pain, only everyone else will…

That is what federal capitalism is about. It is about allowing our federal government to make liberal preferences and invest our tax dollars, especially in social experiments and areas not authorized by our written Constitution. And the only ones who seem to profit in these ventures are the politically well connected.

Our founders never intended to allow our federal government to engage in capitalism and invest federal revenue to promote, e.g., science or useful arts.

In fact our Constitution states in crystal clear language, Congress shall have power “To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts . . . ” with a very specific limitation which is “. . . by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.”

Our founder never intended, nor did they by the wording of our Constitution, grant power to Congress to engage in capitalism and invest tax revenue beyond the list of specifications found beneath Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1. In fact, one of our forefathers confirms this as follows:

"The framers of the Constitution guarded so much against a possibility of such partial preferences as might be given, if Congress had the right to grant them, that, even to encourage learning and useful arts, the granting of patents is the extent of their power. And surely nothing could be less dangerous to the sovereignty or interest of the individual States than the encouragement which might be given to ingenious inventors or promoters of valuable inventions in the arts and sciences. The encouragement which the General Government might give to the fine arts, to commerce, to manufactures, and agriculture, might, if judiciously applied, redound to the honor of Congress, and the splendor, magnificence, and real advantage of the United States; but the wise framers of our Constitution saw that, if Congress had the power of exerting what has been called a royal munificence for these purposes, Congress might, like many royal benefactors, misplace their munificence; might elevate sycophants, and be inattentive to men unfriendly to the views of Government; might reward the ingenuity of the citizens of one State, and neglect a much greater genius of another. A citizen of a powerful State it might be said, was attended to, whilst that of one of less weight in the Federal scale was totally neglected. It is not sufficient, to remove these objections, to say, as some gentlemen have said, that Congress in incapable of partiality or absurdities, and that they are as far from committing them as my colleagues or myself. I tell them the Constitution was formed on a supposition of human frailty, and to restrain abuses of mistaken powers.” See: Annals of Congress Feb 7th,1792 Representative Page

So why is our federal government allowed to get away with interfering with a free market, free enterprise system which our Constitution was designed to protect? Why is Congress allowed to engage in capitalism by "investing’ our federal tax revenue for countless causes and objectives not authorized by our Constitution, which in turn obstructs and interferes with individual enterprise? Could it be that a clever use of language, which nefariously and falsely presumes “capitalism”, in all its forms and all its practices, is indistinguishable from a free market, free enterprise system?

JWK

The Federal Reserve System of 1913 and the Sixteenth Amendment, also of 1913, have provided the necessary tools to folks in government to spread the evil tentacles of democratic capitalism into almost every corner of our once free market, free enterprise system.

You don’t have to convince me John, that our government does A LOT of things our founders never intended. But, government interference is now accepted, and unfortunately expected by each party as it comes to power.

I really don’t know how it could ever be fixed. Term limits in Congress and Senate would be a good place to start on many problems, but the lawmakers will never pass laws detrimental to themselves. The irony that the people stealing our tax money and wasting it, are the same people who get to pass laws declaring that what they’re doing isn’t theft, is lost on most Americans and especially Liberals. Their view is that more theft is better because everyone except themselves is too stupid and greedy to use their money wisely anyway… The average liberal hasn’t learned from history that socialism can not ever work. They’re being taught the opposite. Their leaders know it though, and are pushing hard for young people to over ride common sense and vote for it anyway, which they eventually will…

I could be wrong but your above comment seems to indicate you have resigned yourself to accepting outright theft taking place via federal capitalism, and even accept and expect it. Additionally, you seem to be more upset with our “liberal” legislators practicing federal capitalism, that ”Their view is that more theft is better because everyone except themselves is too stupid and greedy to use their money wisely anyway… The average liberal hasn’t learned from history that socialism can not ever work.”

I think it is a mistake of our [the people’s] own doing to accept and expect the evil consequences of federal capitalism . . . and regardless of which legislators engage in the practice. The above quote I provided from Representative Page is frighteningly accurate, and portrays the very evils we, the people, now experience ___ evils put upon the people by both political party leaderships ___ as they act in concert to plunder our federal treasury. What good is it to have a constitution, one which was intentionally designed to control and limit those we elect, if its provisions can, with impunity, be set aside by the very principals intended to be control and limited by it?

Of course, we were amply warned about submitting to such tyranny!

“When a free people submit to oppressive acts, passed in violation of their constitution, for a single day, they have thrown down the palladium of their liberty. Submit to despotism for an hour and you concede the principle. John Adams said, in 1775, Nip the shoots of arbitrary power in the bud. It is the only thing a people determined to be free can do. Republics have often failed, and have been succeeded by the most revolting despotisms; and always it was the voice of timidity, cowardice, or false leaders counseling submission, that led to the final downfall of freedom. It was the cowardice and treachery of the Senate of Rome that allowed the usurper to gain power, inch by inch, to overthrow the Republic. The history of the downfall of Republics is the same in all ages. The first inch that is yielded to despotism __ the first blow, dealt at the Constitution, that is not resisted is the beginning of the end of the nation’s ruin.” ___ THE OLD GUARD, A MONTHLY JOURNAL DEVOTED TO THE PRINCIPLES OF 1776 AND 1787.

How do we fix the problem? Perhaps that “fix’ begins with ordinary people joining together to preserve and protect our written Constitution, and rising up by the tens of thousands to condemn the leaderships of both political parties when they knowingly and willingly join to subvert our Constitution and engage in federal capitalism intentionally designed to fatten their own fortunes, and those of their friends.

I believe the good people of Puerto Rico have set an example which the good people of the United States need to learn.

https://youtu.be/vp3JZyuozzU

JWK

The Federal Reserve System of 1913 and the Sixteenth Amendment, also of 1913, have provided the necessary tools to folks in government to spread the evil tentacles of democratic capitalism into almost every corner of our once free market, free enterprise system.

I agree that only the people, and more specifically the voting people can change the system.

In high school, I had a civics teacher say one of the most profound statements I’ve ever heard regarding governments. He said “The first priority of every government that had ever come into existence is self preservation.”

In dictatorships, the government simply, jails or kills those that dissent. But how does a Democratic Republic like ours, with a Constitution preserve itself? Not by force, but by distraction, misinformation, dumbing down the citizens and creating apathy are some of the tools used to this end and perhaps the greatest tactic of all, divide and conquer.

What’s happening in our country is no accident. We are slowly, step by step having our rights and Independence stripped from us by an ever growing and intrusive government, being pushed primarily by the left. I don’t see any lasting reversal of this trend. Our young people are being taught to hate their own country and are moving steadily to destroy it. Do you seriously see a way to turn things around?

fallenturtle · 2019-08-20T15:46:57.518Z

johnwk2:

I already gave a clear definition. You simply do not accept it, and prefer to obfuscate.

According to the International Monetary Fund, “The essential feature of capitalism is the motive to make a profit.” LINK

This is essentially what I said when writing “The most distinguishing feature of “capitalism” is the investment and manipulation of capital to achieve an anticipated profit and/or goal.”

Try paying attention to what I have written.

From your link (emphasis added by me):

Capitalism is often thought of as an economic system in which private actors own and control property in accord with their interests, and demand and supply freely set prices in markets in a way that can serve the best interests of society.

The essential feature of capitalism is the motive to make a profit.

Your abuse of the word capitalism stems from the fact that you keep ignoring that capitalism is about private ownership. Yes, in the world of political science there are modifiers for capitalism that do modify who owns and controls what for example “state capitalism”. Use those established terms and we can relate to what you are trying to communicate. On the other hand you’re going to have to do more than post in an internet forum if you want us to take serious any new terms you coin like “federal capitalism”. Like for example write a dissertation or get written up in some peer-reviewed journal.

johnwk2:

I did not write, in what you just quoted, anything about investments to turn a profit.

And it says in your source “the motive to make a profit” not “profit and/or goal”. Clearly profit is implied when using the term capitalism.

fallenturtle · 2019-08-20T15:55:07.479Z

johnwk2:

fallenturtle:

At least you stopped using “democrat capitalism” after I pointed it out that it meant the opposite of what you thought it meant…

Only in your own little world.

I still use “democratic capitalism” as well as “federal capitalism” ___ both of which involve the investment of capital to achieve an anticipated profit and/or goal.”

JWK

The Federal Reserve System of 1913 and the Sixteenth Amendment, also of 1913, have provided the necessary tools to folks in government to spread the evil tentacles of democratic capitalism into almost every corner of our once free market, free enterprise system.

Oh, so you do continue to incorrectly use established terms and make up your own. That’s a shame.

en.wikipedia.org

Democratic capitalism

Democratic capitalism, also referred to as market democracy, is a political and economic system. It integrates resource allocation by marginal productivity (synonymous with free-market capitalism), with policies of resource allocation by social entitlement. The policies which characterise the system are enacted by democratic governments. Democratic capitalism was implemented widely in the 20th century, particularly in Europe and the Western world after the Second World War. The coexistence of ca...

https://www.google.com/search?q="federal+capitalism"

en.wikipedia.org

State capitalism

State capitalism is an economic system in which the state undertakes business and commercial (i.e. for-profit) economic activity and where the means of production are nationalized as state-owned enterprises (including the processes of capital accumulation, centralized management and wage labor). The definition can also include the state dominance of corporatized government agencies (agencies organized along business-management practices) or of public companies such as publicly listed corporations...

fallenturtle · 2019-08-20T15:57:49.731Z

johnwk2:

I wrote in answer to your question: "…according to Chief Justice White in STANTON v. BALTIC MINING CO(1916), ” by the previous ruling it was settled that the provisions of the 16th Amendment conferred no new power of taxation . . . “ And I agree! Congress always had power to lay and collect taxes calculated from “incomes”, and without having to apportion such a tax! If you don’t believe me, study Flint vs. Stone Tracy which was decided before the 16th Amendment, and upheld a tax calculated from income as not requiring an apportionment.

Great, now we know what you think was the situation before the 16th Amendment, now John, what do you think the 16th Amendment changed?

fallenturtle · 2019-08-20T16:16:09.995Z

johnwk2:

Not even close. Study Eisner vs Macomber and get back to me.

What are you talking about, dude? My definition is correct.
From wikipedia:

Eisner v. Macomber , 252 U.S. 189 (1920),[1] was a tax case before the United States Supreme Court that is notable for the following holdings:

A pro rata stock dividend where a shareholder received no actual cash or other property and retained the same proportionate share of ownership of the corporation as was held prior to the dividend by the shareholder was not income to the shareholder under the Sixteenth Amendment.

An income tax that was imposed by the Revenue Act of 1916 on such a dividend was unconstitutional even if the dividend indirectly represented accrued earnings of the corporation.

johnwk2 · 2019-08-20T16:19:47.897Z

fallenturtle:

Oh, so you do continue to incorrectly use established terms and make up your own. That’s a shame.

Wrong. It is you who ignore what is self-evident, and cling to a contemporary misrepresentation of the core meaning of capitalism and capitalist…

Another example of an intentional desire to evade the meaning of a word is the contemporary use of “gay”, which is incorrectly used in place of “sexual deviant”, or “homosexual”. I do not embrace attempts to sugar coat, or evade what is, by misapplying the meaning of words. You do. And you are free to do so. I will continue to use language in a manner which actually projects subtle distinctions which others attempt to evade.

JWK

The Federal Reserve System of 1913 and the Sixteenth Amendment, also of 1913, have provided the necessary tools to folks in government to spread the evil tentacles of democratic capitalism into almost every corner of our once free market, free enterprise system.

johnwk2 · 2019-08-20T16:26:49.535Z

fallenturtle:

johnwk2:

Not even close. Study Eisner vs Macomber and get back to me.

What are you talking about, dude? My definition is correct.

I’m talking about your definition of "income’. As I recommended, for the definition of “income”, within the meaning of the 16th Amendment, study Eisner vs Macomber and get back to me.

How am I supposed to teach you if you don’t follow instructions?

JWK

The right to keep and bear is specifically intended to maintain an armed citizenry capable to defend itself against a despotic government.

fallenturtle · 2019-08-20T16:42:03.328Z

Optrader:

The issue I have with this is that the Federal Government has no capital of its own to invest. All the money the government has is from revenue generated by taxes. The government is just acting as a single agent and “investing” (supposedly) the money owned commonly by the people for the common good, this is the “common regulation” aspect of Socialism. The government is regulated by the common will of the people.

Common regulation doesn’t seem to be a socialism thing: https://repository.uchastings.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3156&context=hastings_law_journal
I just skimmed this paper, I might go back and read it, but I think its saying “common regulation” is just government regulation and not necessarily tied to whether or not the economy is socialist, capitalist, or other.

Optrader:

But, I see and concede your point too. Yes, the government is using money for specific things to achieve specific goals, which is capitalism, but then wouldn’t that definition make everything the government does with money make our government capitalists?

But that’s not really capitalism. Capitalism is about profit. Not just any goal. If my goal is to wallpaper my room and I do so by sticking dollar bills to the wall, I’m using money to achieve a goal, but I wouldn’t call that capitalism. When we water down the word is starts to loose its meaning.
When the government takes tax dollars and redistributes it via welfare and progressive taxes, its not making a profit, so its not “capitalism”, its just income “redistribution”.

Optrader:

I think intent and result make the biggest practical difference in the opposing views of liberals and conservatives on the role of government. One view believes the good of the individual is more important, the other believes the good of the masses is more important and both use the government to the greatest extent they can to bring their views about.

Close, but I think you have to keep in mind that on the political spectrum liberals are closer to the middle. The far right believes the individual is more important than the masses. These are your Ayn Rand fans. The typical conservative believes that some individual liberties need to be sacrificed for the greater good (generally social issues like marriage, recreational drugs, abortion, etc) but that in general the individual is more important than the masses. With liberals it starts to lean the otherway. Liberals support a lot more laws and regulations that help the masses over the individual… but they still support the individual over the masses in some ways in regards to personal financial freedoms, the ability to get rich, that sort of stuff. This is why they are “liberals” but the liberty thing does still come into play. The far left is pretty much the masses over the individual, social control of industry, that sort of stuff.

Optrader:

The government can be either or both and they don’t care. They get rich and stay in power either way

I think it can be argued that the more left the government is, the less “getting rich” plays a factor. Power is always an issue which is why its important to have minority rights and a government with checks and balances.

johnwk2 · 2019-08-20T16:56:31.698Z

fallenturtle:

johnwk2:

I wrote in answer to your question: "…according to Chief Justice White in STANTON v. BALTIC MINING CO(1916), ” by the previous ruling it was settled that the provisions of the 16th Amendment conferred no new power of taxation . . . “ And I agree! Congress always had power to lay and collect taxes calculated from “incomes”, and without having to apportion such a tax! If you don’t believe me, study Flint vs. Stone Tracy which was decided before the 16th Amendment, and upheld a tax calculated from income as not requiring an apportionment.

Great, now we know what you think was the situation before the 16th Amendment, now John, what do you think the 16th Amendment changed?

You are not paying attention.

To find your answer, read what you quoted from me above, very, very slowly, especially that part in which I stated I agree with the court when it wrote “… the provisions of the 16th Amendment conferred no new power of taxation…”

I then went on to document a case, before the 16th Amendment was adopted, in which the court upheld an un-apportioned tax calculated from income, establishing the court was correct when it wrote “… the provisions of the 16th Amendment conferred no new power of taxation…”

I suggest you study Flint vs Stone Tracy to learn why the tax there was considered an “indirect tax” and did not require apportionment in spite of the Constitution’s command that No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.

JWK

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez claims to be an advocate of hard working people living in the Bronx. If that is so, why is she not advocating an end to the unconstitutional “Temporary Victory Tax” of 1943, which began an un-apportioned direct tax on the property which working people have earned by the sweat of their labor?

fallenturtle · 2019-08-20T17:28:51.447Z

johnwk2:

Wrong. It is you who ignore what is self-evident, and cling to a contemporary misrepresentation of the core meaning of capitalism and capitalist…

It’s not a “contemporary misrepresentation”. I’m using the word capitalism as its been defined over the last 150 or so years. You’re the one misrepresenting it.

johnwk2:

Another example of an intentional desire to evade the meaning of a word is the contemporary use of “gay”, which is incorrectly used in place of “sexual deviant”, or “homosexual”. I do not embrace attempts to sugar coat, or evade what is, by misapplying the meaning of words. You do. And you are free to do so.

Clearly you aren’t well versed on the history of the word “gay”. It’s use in regards to “immorality” goes back much farther than apparently you realized:

The word may have started to acquire associations of immorality as early as the 14th century, but had certainly acquired them by the 17th. By the late 17th century, it had acquired the specific meaning of “addicted to pleasures and dissipations”, an extension of its primary meaning of “carefree” implying “uninhibited by moral constraints”. A gay woman was a prostitute, a gay man a womanizer, and a gay house a brothel.

source: Gay - Wikipedia

johnwk2:

I will continue to use language in a manner which actually projects subtle distinctions which others attempt to evade.

Oh, you mean make up your own terms and use other terms differently than what they mean. Its not like we rely on a common language to help understand each other, or anything.

johnwk2 · 2019-08-20T17:35:43.398Z

fallenturtle:

But that’s not really capitalism. Capitalism is about profit.

The investment of capital is not always for profit. Sometimes capitalists invest money to enjoy the pleasures of life. Other times capital is invested to achieve specific goals, such as personal protection. And Obama’s investment in green energy was allegedly to accomplish a goal …save the earth from climate change. Have you forgotten this “goal”?

The fact is, capitalism can also be practiced by governments, as in Obama’s green energy swindling operation in which taxpayer "capital’ was "invested’ by Obama in a money laundering operation in which 80 percent of the capital invested went to Obama’s donors. See : 80% of Obama green jobs money goes to Obama donors.

A free market, free enterprise system by contrast is marked by people being free to pursue their own economic interests, without government preferences, and includes the creation of wealth through agriculture, manufacturing, scientific discoveries, etc., and in most cases is assisted by the investment of capital in such ventures, but being free of government creating special preferences.

Jefferson was spot on when saying: ”Agriculture, manufactures, commerce, and navigation, the four pillars of our prosperity, are the most thriving when left most free to individual enterprise.”

JWK

The Federal Reserve System of 1913 and the Sixteenth Amendment, also of 1913, have provided the necessary tools to folks in government to spread the evil tentacles of democratic capitalism into almost every corner of our once free market, free enterprise system.

fallenturtle · 2019-08-20T17:36:12.814Z

johnwk2:

You are not paying attention.

To find your answer, read what you quoted from me above, very, very slowly, especially that part in which I stated I agree with the court when it wrote “… the provisions of the 16th Amendment conferred no new power of taxation…”

I then went on to document a case, before the 16th Amendment was adopted, in which the court upheld an un-apportioned tax calculated from income, establishing the court was correct when it wrote “… the provisions of the 16th Amendment conferred no new power of taxation…”

OK, so your answer is that the 16th Amendment "prohibited the previous complete and plenary power of income taxation possessed by Congress from the beginning from being taken out of the category of indirect taxation to which it inherently belonged, and being placed in the category of direct taxation.”

Glad we could clear that up.

johnwk2:

I suggest you study Flint vs Stone Tracy to learn why the tax there was considered an “indirect tax” and did not require apportionment in spite of the Constitution’s command that No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.

I’ll do that.

johnwk2:

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez claims to be an advocate of hard working people living in the Bronx. If that is so, why is she not advocating an end to the unconstitutional “Temporary Victory Tax” of 1943, which began an un-apportioned direct tax on the property which working people have earned by the sweat of their labor?

You are not paying attention.

johnwk2 · 2019-08-20T17:54:00.733Z

fallenturtle:

johnwk2:

You are not paying attention.

To find your answer, read what you quoted from me above, very, very slowly, especially that part in which I stated I agree with the court when it wrote “… the provisions of the 16th Amendment conferred no new power of taxation…”

I then went on to document a case, before the 16th Amendment was adopted, in which the court upheld an un-apportioned tax calculated from income, establishing the court was correct when it wrote “… the provisions of the 16th Amendment conferred no new power of taxation…”

OK, so your answer is that the 16th Amendment "prohibited the previous complete and plenary power of income taxation possessed by Congress from the beginning from being taken out of the category of indirect taxation to which it inherently belonged, and being placed in the category of direct taxation.

Well, isn’t that cute? So, now you are going to misrepresent what I wrote.

JWK
The right to keep and bear is specifically intended to maintain an armed citizenry capable to defend itself against a despotic government.

johnwk2 · 2019-08-20T18:00:00.093Z

fallenturtle:

Oh, you mean make up your own terms …

Your insulting charge is without foundation. Attack the post, not the poster!

cap·i·tal

/ˈkapədl/

noun

wealth in the form of money or other assets owned by a person or organization or available or contributed for a particular purpose such as starting a company or investing.

“rates of return on invested capital were high”

synonyms: money, finance(s), funds, the wherewithal, the means, assets, wealth, resources, reserves

ism:

A productive suffix in the formation of nouns denoting action or practice, state or condition, principles, doctrines, a usage or characteristic, devotion or adherence, etc .

JWK

In every oppressive country like communist China, socialist Cuba, North Korea, Venezuela, etc., the people are disarmed and suffer the loss of inalienable rights under an iron fisted government which lives large on the people’s labor. Forewarned is forearmed.

fallenturtle · 2019-08-20T18:01:09.100Z

johnwk2:

The investment of capital is not always for profit. Sometimes capitalists invest money to enjoy the pleasures of life. Other times capital is invested to achieve specific goals, such as personal protection.

The ultimate goal of investing money is to make a profit… then those profits can be used to enjoy the pleasures of life. Even if the money is invested for “personal protection” the mechanism of investment is designed to turn a profit.

johnwk2:

And Obama’s investment in green energy was allegedly to accomplish a goal …save the earth from climate change. Have you forgotten this “goal”?

If the investment was to make profit for the government, then its state capitalism.
If the investment was to protect the planet, then its just a subsidy and part of us being a mixed economy.
If the investment was to make profit for private citizens, like you are implying, then its crony capitalism.

johnwk2:

A free market, free enterprise system by contrast is marked by people being free to pursue their own economic interests, without government preferences, and includes the creation of wealth through agriculture, manufacturing, scientific discoveries, etc., and in most cases is assisted by the investment of capital in such ventures, but being free of government creating special preferences.

A free-market system also leads to massive income inequality and economic depressions. Regulation is needed for a healthy market and society.

fallenturtle · 2019-08-20T18:05:35.433Z

johnwk2:

fallenturtle:

Oh, you mean make up your own terms …

Your insulting charge is without foundation. Attack the post, not the poster!

cap·i·tal

/ˈkapədl/

noun

wealth in the form of money or other assets owned by a person or organization or available or contributed for a particular purpose such as starting a company or investing.

“rates of return on invested capital were high”

synonyms: money, finance(s), funds, the wherewithal, the means, assets, wealth, resources, reserves

ism:

A productive suffix in the formation of nouns denoting action or practice, state or condition, principles, doctrines, a usage or characteristic, devotion or adherence, etc .

JWK

In every oppressive country like communist China, socialist Cuba, North Korea, Venezuela, etc., the people are disarmed and suffer the loss of inalienable rights under an iron fisted government which lives large on the people’s labor. Forewarned is forearmed.

You laid the foundation. We’ve been over this… words are not that simple. You can’t always depend on the roots of a word to fully define the word. Kind of like how socialism doesn’t mean anything involving people or being social.

fallenturtle · 2019-08-20T18:12:28.566Z

johnwk2:

fallenturtle:

johnwk2:

You are not paying attention.

To find your answer, read what you quoted from me above, very, very slowly, especially that part in which I stated I agree with the court when it wrote “… the provisions of the 16th Amendment conferred no new power of taxation…”

I then went on to document a case, before the 16th Amendment was adopted, in which the court upheld an un-apportioned tax calculated from income, establishing the court was correct when it wrote “… the provisions of the 16th Amendment conferred no new power of taxation…”

OK, so your answer is that the 16th Amendment "prohibited the previous complete and plenary power of income taxation possessed by Congress from the beginning from being taken out of the category of indirect taxation to which it inherently belonged, and being placed in the category of direct taxation.

Well, isn’t that cute? So, now you are going to misrepresent what I wrote.

JWK
The right to keep and bear is specifically intended to maintain an armed citizenry capable to defend itself against a despotic government.

If you don’t want to be misrepresented, then answer questions clearly. Since you refused to answer the question, I had to make assumptions. I figured it was a safe assumption considering its part of the same darn sentence you agree with:

…by the previous ruling it was settled that the provisions of the 16th Amendment conferred no new power of taxation, but simply prohibited the previous complete and plenary power of income taxation possessed by Congress from the beginning from being taken out of the category of indirect taxation to which it inherently belonged, and being placed in the category of direct taxation.

johnwk2 · 2019-08-20T18:14:58.845Z

fallenturtle:

Clearly you aren’t well versed on the history of the word “gay”. It’s use in regards to “immorality” goes back much farther than apparently you realized:

So now you are charging me with your own deficiency.

In regard to the word “gay” being used domestically with reference to homosexuality, it began appearing about the late 1920s to mid 30s. By the mid 50s to 60s it was popularly used to avoid using homosexual…

BTW, I have my own library, and a number of very old dictionaries which confirm my findings, in addition to researching this very issue while on the campus of the University of Maryland during the 1980s and mid 90s.

JWK

There is no surer way to weaken, subdue, demoralize and then conquer a prosperous and freedom loving people than by allowing and encouraging the poverty stricken, poorly educated, low-skilled, criminal and diseased populations of other countries to invade that country, and make the country’s existing citizens tax-slaves to support the economic needs of such invaders.*