UN to Have Say

[Osric]

  You know we was doing pretty good till we stepped into WWII and thought we had to save the World.  There was a time when the USA minded it own business for the most part.  Since we kicked the Brits out and settled our own affairs we was doing pretty good.
  Some times you have to let other peoples settle their own affairs.  We do not like folks a messing with us. 

While I agree with the sentiment that sometimes you need to let people settle their own affairs, I have to wonder by what standard you think we had it pretty good until WWII?  The USA was pretty much an under performing backwater that (while thought as a "sleeping giant"), was pretty insignificant by any industrialized standard.

[Toolman]

Osric,

I am not quite sure where you are getting your info., But I remember my grandfather tellling me how disappointed he was with this country when he passed on 7 yrs. ago. He was a life long factory worker, a simple person who hated the thought of a government handout, including social security. Simple math will prove social security is the biggest rip off and poor investment of hard earned money. But, he would tell me how self sufficient this country was up to and including the years of WWII. Nearly everything that most households used was made here in the U.S. During the WWII everyone pulled together and rationed metals, clothe, and food to supply materials to produce equipment for military. Wives worked in steel mills and other factories while their husbands fought the war. We produced most of what we used. It wasnt stamped made in China. The country started going ass backwards when Roosevelt, who was a flaming liberal, duped us with the income tax. He called it the "Victory Tax".. It was only to remain until the war was over. It was supposed to help pay for the war. I quess were still paying for that war because it never went away. Then, he enacted the social security tax, which was supposed to pay benefits for retirement. After the U.S. Supreme court shot that down twice, he had it ok'd
by those he appointed throughout his 4 terms as president. Suddenly after his appointees were put in place, the social security law was deemed constitutional by his appointed Supreme court. The Supreme court previously ruled that it is unconstitutional to force an American to pay for a benefit that he/she does not choose to participate in. Today, our goveernment calls that a monopoly, when they do it, they call it a beneficial program.

So, today things are certainly worse off. Most products`produced overseas, loss of freedom of choice, and a society that is more concerned about how outsiders think of us, instead of us taking care of our own. I've read alot about the 1940's and it's obvious we we're a true super power then.

[Ron Wenrich]

My great uncle used to tell me if our forefathers had as much gumption as the people of the day, they never would have gotten beyond the Susquehanna river.  That was in 1964.

A liittle history, just to improve accuracy of any rants.     The income tax was proposed by Adam Smith in 1776 in The Wealth of Nations.  He proposed a progressive tax that would tax the rich.  It was also proposed in 1848 by Karl Marx in the Communist Manifesto.  The first income tax passed in the US was in 1861.  The president at that time was Abraham Lincoln.  The tax was later rescinded in 1872 and was tried to be renacted in 1894.  The 16th Amendment made the income tax constitutional in 1913.  The president at that time was Woodrow Wilson.  Roosevelt had nothing to do with enacting the income tax.

Social Security was enacted in 1937 and was part of the New Deal.  Social Security wasn't what was struck down by the court, and was upheld in Helvering vs Davis.  It had to do with other portions of the New Deal.  Particularly where the federal government had forced unemployment insurance on the states.  It was a seperation of state and federal government powers type of struggle.  Social Security was seen as a way to allow older workers a means to retire and allow younger workers to get jobs.  It was viewed as a ways to reduce unemployment, considering they were coming off of the Great Depression.  Its those glory years before WWII, from 1928-1939. 

The judge packing bill that you described sought to have all judges removed after the age of 70½.  That would have removed 6 judges from the Supreme Court.  The bill did not pass. 

Just for the record, I don't really classify myself as a flaming liberal.  But, I do like to look at things in a factual way.  The reality is China has a massive labor force that will work for a lot less than Americans.  Even with our improved productivity rates, its hard to compete with those rates.  China has linked their currency to ours, since we are their biggest market.  That has flooded the US with Chinese goods where Americans are extremely willing to hand over their paycheck for the trinkets.  You can thank Park Ave. and Walmart for that.  If we didn't buy it, they wouldn't be selling it.

I'm also a big supporter of the Fair Tax.  That would do away with the Income Tax and implement a 27% consumption tax.  It would cover all US expenditures and would only be on new goods and services.  It would encourage savings where the income tax encourages consumption.  I'm sure there's some problems with it, but its better than having a law that no one understands.

Social Security is here to stay.  My opinion is that privitization would be an utter failure.  The proposal is that the feds would tell you where you could put your cash.  To much possibility for corruption.  There is also a proposal for means testing, which would penalize those of us that have been able to save money.   People in this country don't want to save.  My parents were Depression kids and have taught me to pay for what I get and to stay out of debt. 

Yes, some people are worse off.  But, even those in "poverty" are better off than many wealthy people in other countries.  Its all in how you want to measure things.

[OneWithWood]

Thank-you, Ron, for those clarifications.

I agree with your fair tax approach and your take on social security.

I guess that makes you a 'flaming liberal' by association 

[Osric]

Well, I'm getting my information from my profession.  I'm a history teacher (failed professor?) and have done my share of research in US history.

Prior to WWII, the US wasn't a 'great' country by just about any standard.  Other countries had higher standards of living, better paying jobs, put more money into research, etc.  We were a "sleeping giant" because other countries looked at us, saw our vast resources and economic potential and were justifiably concerned (there was  a big school of thought in the late 1800s and early 1900s that projected that the two countries most likely to replace England/France/Germany et. al. on the world stage was the USA and Russia (this is pre soviet union), based completely on the idea that those two countries had the most resources available to them.

WWII gave us the opportunity to capitalize on our potential.  Our industrial base exploded, our workforce became highly skilled, equal rights became an issue (because women and African Americans weren't accepted in the military and found ways to serve at home), our economy stabilized (brought about in part because of the New Deal programs, in part because of the expansion of the workforce).

It is easy for people to look back at the 'good ole days'.  I'm guilty of that myself and I haven't reached 40 yet.  But I'm also painfully aware that if I lived 20, 40 or 100 years ago, my standard of living would be minuscule compared to what it is today. 

[thedeeredude]

No capitation, or other direct, tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to the census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken.  -Constitution, article 1 section 9

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States -Constitution, article 1 section 8

[olyman]

.............................
tomorrow morning wouldnt be soon enough--maybe the muslims that blew the twin towers--will make a mistake, and hit the un bldg--------------------

I don't like that thought at all... any life is more important than that.

I must agree...despite my general agreement with the Bard..  remember this--theres muslims blowing up other muslims overseas because they dont like the "conservative" ones