Who are you voting for?
- Thread starter hhhlga89
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
M
to be fair Grunge I don't think you and I are going to do justice to the Hayek/Keynes debate on economic history.....I'll settle for a truce for now
here are two economists who really don't share your view
Ron Paul Debates Paul Krugman. Who Won the Battle of the Pauls? - YouTube
but we could post this stuff back and forth for ever.
well Grunge I live in the UK ..we are not as wealthy as you guys and I will say this. It is true that a lot of families do not manage month to month but here in the UK this state of affairs is primarily a moral one. They are addicted to consumerism. 80% of my income is in one form or another of welfare. My rent is entirely paid for by the state ...in addition I get 1300 + a month child ( 5 children) tax credit"....which is not a tax credit but a welfare payment and then my part time wages areanother 320 a month. If it were not for the welfare I could not survive. But here's the rub. We have had over inflated house prices/rents for over two decades. ...not because of a free market...but because of price fixing and low interest rates that have never allowed house prices to reflect and relate to real incomes. So nobody can afford to buy without incurring massive debt. ( banks are now no longer lending anyway)...... the politicians are chained to debt/ infaltion because the people literally cannot live without welfare. Any politician who talks about seriously ending welfare is dead in the water.We have a national welfare called child benefit which EVERYONE is entitled to.
So people have been given plastic cards and told to take out loans here there and everywhere. I know people on welfare who are driving 4x4's and taking holidays in the med every year. Their kids have a hundred gadgets, they smoke and drink excessivley and they refuse to work because it pays to stay on welfare. OK I'm a Christian...I don't live like that....I have actually saved money...on welfare! I want to work and pay my rent in cash and in a genuine free market I could do that. I could live on less than half of what I get.
Ecclesiastes famously says there is a time for everything. There is a time for growth....and there is a time for recession.....but Keynesianism says that anything other than growth is failure. Then the media confirms it. Falling gropwth = political failure. But periods of austerity are not failure. It is simply reality. Sometimes we have to go without....but politics is the art of pretending otherwise. That is why politicians hire really clever dudes like Paul Krugman to tell us that it's "more complicated than that". That's why I love Ron Paul....I see a politician who actually believes in something that just makes sense. Then I watch him debate Krugman expecting to see the great genius expose the simpleton and .....actually it doesn't happen. Ron Paul aske the question...why do these people know better than us simply by virtue of their appointment to the fed or to central banks?
Economists are like Scientists ....they function as the great high priests but they are full of sophistry....or to put it in contemporary language ....they are full of sheeee
Last edited:
From Apathy back into Bondage
Why American Freedom is in its Eleventh Hour
A well-known self-destructive cycle of democratic behavior has been attributed to an eighteenth century historian by the name of Alexander Tytler. Whether Tytler is the original author or not, the concept of democratic self-destruction has been proven accurate, right here in America.
“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.”
Why American Freedom is in its Eleventh Hour
A well-known self-destructive cycle of democratic behavior has been attributed to an eighteenth century historian by the name of Alexander Tytler. Whether Tytler is the original author or not, the concept of democratic self-destruction has been proven accurate, right here in America.
“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.”
T
I hate to make a comment that is actually about the original post, but I am most likely voting for Romney Now, you can return to your arguments in a thread that doesn't have anything to do with the topic you are arguing about
Now, you can return to your arguments in a thread that doesn't have anything to do with the topic you are arguing about
T
to be fair Grunge I don't think you and I are going to do justice to the Hayek/Keynes debate on economic history.....I'll settle for a truce for now
I do not know the UK system, so I really can't comment. But I must say, there appears to be at least one benefit from the system you describe over what we have in the US.
In the US, companies have become the social safety net.
As an employer, it is my job to provide health insurance to full-time employees. Therefore, I'm less likely to hire full-time employees. I'll be looking to hire part-time, getting just under the hours required before benefit requirements kick in. If I have two employees who are doing the exact same thing, one's a single mom with 3 kids, and one's a college student still living with his parents, the law dictates that I pay the woman more, because she has a family to feed ... but they're doing the same exact job.
It is not the employer's job to provide welfare, it's the government's job. Maybe the UK has gone too far into that extreme, but I think it's better than where the US has gone.
C
I dunno. With me its not about gays being able to be married or not. There has been a seperation of church and state for as far back as I can remember. My country was FOUNDED on christian beleifs. So when the government starts interferring with my religious freedom, its not just about whether or not they should be able to be married. Its where is my country in GENERAL headed at this point? AGAIN. This is my personal opinion. Some people dont agree with me. IF you dont good for you. Its a touchy subject, and sometimes life is just like that. Comments to yourself please.
Its a touchy subject, and sometimes life is just like that. Comments to yourself please.
M
I hate to make a comment that is actually about the original post, but I am most likely voting for Romney Now, you can return to your arguments in a thread that doesn't have anything to do with the topic you are arguing about
Now, you can return to your arguments in a thread that doesn't have anything to do with the topic you are arguing about
.....but on topic....why would a Paulite ( I'm making assumptions based on your avartar) be voting for Romney...just asking
T
AGAIN. This is my personal opinion. Some people dont agree with me. IF you dont good for you. Its a touchy subject, and sometimes life is just like that. Comments to yourself please.
Its a touchy subject, and sometimes life is just like that. Comments to yourself please.
I'm just curious, though: if you don't want people to comment, why are you posting on a public board? It's kinda like going to a beach and complaining about all the sand, ya know?
I dunno. With me its not about gays being able to be married or not. There has been a seperation of church and state for as far back as I can remember. My country was FOUNDED on christian beleifs. So when the government starts interferring with my religious freedom, its not just about whether or not they should be able to be married. Its where is my country in GENERAL headed at this point? AGAIN. This is my personal opinion. Some people dont agree with me. IF you dont good for you. Its a touchy subject, and sometimes life is just like that. Comments to yourself please.
Its a touchy subject, and sometimes life is just like that. Comments to yourself please.
Catholics on contraceptives, Charity, Can’t say the blessing in government funded retirement homes, removing GOD from school, removing the cross from government land, removing from public speech “ DNC “ making Christian feel like the bad guy,
AND BEFORE YOU SAY ANYTHING
We pay taxes to our government, That is our land as well, Parents also fund schools,
Before long you will not even be able to mention Jesus.
AND BEFORE YOU SAY ANYTHING
We pay taxes to our government, That is our land as well, Parents also fund schools,
Before long you will not even be able to mention Jesus.
T
What about Catholics on contraceptives or charity?
Anyone may say any prayer he or she wishes in any retirement home. Even government-funded ones. What is not allowed is for the administration of a government-funded retirement home to lead the residents in prayer. That would violate the constitution. But if residents want to pray, they absolutely may. In fact, if any resident is prevented from praying, that, too, is a violation of the constitution, and ACLU would be happy to defend such a resident in a case against the home.
To my knowledge, no human institution, including schools, including even public schools, has ever succeeded in telling God where God may or may not go. If you know of some sort of spell or curse that prevents the Holy Spirit from entering a certain place, I would be very curious to hear (1) you evidence to support that this has happened, and (2) the circumstances in which it happened.
Just as above, any student or teacher may pray in school. What is not allowed is for a teacher or administrator to initiate a prayer or teaching of any particular religion, with a possible exception for a general "comparative religions" class, where you learn about a religion with all religions getting equal time.
Umm, yes, because it's not yours.
Not sure what this means
I have never been made to feel like "the bad guy." If you have, perhaps you need to look at what you have done.
If and when that ever happens, I will be the first to fight for my constitutional rights.
Anyone may say any prayer he or she wishes in any retirement home. Even government-funded ones. What is not allowed is for the administration of a government-funded retirement home to lead the residents in prayer. That would violate the constitution. But if residents want to pray, they absolutely may. In fact, if any resident is prevented from praying, that, too, is a violation of the constitution, and ACLU would be happy to defend such a resident in a case against the home.
To my knowledge, no human institution, including schools, including even public schools, has ever succeeded in telling God where God may or may not go. If you know of some sort of spell or curse that prevents the Holy Spirit from entering a certain place, I would be very curious to hear (1) you evidence to support that this has happened, and (2) the circumstances in which it happened.
Just as above, any student or teacher may pray in school. What is not allowed is for a teacher or administrator to initiate a prayer or teaching of any particular religion, with a possible exception for a general "comparative religions" class, where you learn about a religion with all religions getting equal time.
Umm, yes, because it's not yours.
Not sure what this means
I have never been made to feel like "the bad guy." If you have, perhaps you need to look at what you have done.
If and when that ever happens, I will be the first to fight for my constitutional rights.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/05/10/georgia-mayor-hopeful-end-prayer-flap-meals/
But Jones, mayor of Port Wentworth, Ga., a town of roughly 3,000 near Savannah, has been doing just that since last week, when the company that provides food for the seniors -- with federal funding -- determined that saying an organized prayer before meals violates the separation of church and state.
I should have to include nothing over catholic contraceptives
But Jones, mayor of Port Wentworth, Ga., a town of roughly 3,000 near Savannah, has been doing just that since last week, when the company that provides food for the seniors -- with federal funding -- determined that saying an organized prayer before meals violates the separation of church and state.
I should have to include nothing over catholic contraceptives
T
People can try to remove God all they want. No one has that power. God is going to go where ever he wants.
If your faith is so weak that you think a government law is going to prevent God from doing something, you are no Christian.
God has been there from the start, and will always be there, no matter what anyone tries to do or say.
If your faith is so weak that you think a government law is going to prevent God from doing something, you are no Christian.
God has been there from the start, and will always be there, no matter what anyone tries to do or say.
T
Well of course. They can't say an ORGANIZED prayer. That would be establishment of religion, which is clearly a violation of the constitution.
If they did not receive federal funding, they could do whatever they wanted to.
With the federal funding, they have to abide by federal laws. Which includes, among other things, not establishing any particular religion.
Individuals are welcome to say grace on their own. I know there are isolated cases where some administrator who doesn't understand the law tells someone who is saying a prayer all by him- or herself to stop, and that is wrong. In those cases, the administrator must be educated, or fired if they won't allow individuals to pray to themselves. Same reason.
I don't even know what this sentence means.
If they did not receive federal funding, they could do whatever they wanted to.
With the federal funding, they have to abide by federal laws. Which includes, among other things, not establishing any particular religion.
Individuals are welcome to say grace on their own. I know there are isolated cases where some administrator who doesn't understand the law tells someone who is saying a prayer all by him- or herself to stop, and that is wrong. In those cases, the administrator must be educated, or fired if they won't allow individuals to pray to themselves. Same reason.
I don't even know what this sentence means.
C
I dont think that implies that his faith is weak, nor his moral character, so I dont know where your coming from, and although god is going to be anywehere he wants to be, this is true, however that doesnt mean I am to say that sinful activity is okay. In myself or others, as I said before...I will fight for my god.
T
Anyone who thinks God is limited has a weak faith. Do you disagree with that? Do you think that someone can have a strong faith and still think that God is limited? I just don't understand how that can be. Perhaps you can explain it to me.
I didn't say anything about anyone's moral character, so if you misunderstood me, and thought I was saying something about someone's moral character, you are right to be confused. I apologize if I said anything that implied that. If you can let me know what, exactly, I said that led you to believe I was commenting on anyone's moral character, I would appreciate it, because I would like to be careful in the future to avoid such language, and not be misunderstood in that way.
But as far as weak faith vs. strong faith, I will stand by that. If you don't think God can take care of himself, you really don't have much of a god to start with. Having a strong or weak faith has nothing to do with morality or sin. You brought that up, and I'm not sure why.
I didn't say anything about anyone's moral character, so if you misunderstood me, and thought I was saying something about someone's moral character, you are right to be confused. I apologize if I said anything that implied that. If you can let me know what, exactly, I said that led you to believe I was commenting on anyone's moral character, I would appreciate it, because I would like to be careful in the future to avoid such language, and not be misunderstood in that way.
But as far as weak faith vs. strong faith, I will stand by that. If you don't think God can take care of himself, you really don't have much of a god to start with. Having a strong or weak faith has nothing to do with morality or sin. You brought that up, and I'm not sure why.