A good Democrat?

[MicroBalrog]

Do you think I could not make the same argument based on the study of references, CS&D? I agree it's cheating, but mellestad clearly thinks that the opinion of American-based APSers doesn't cont because they've not 'visited' the socialist countries. Perhaps the fact I live in one will be influential?

The ability of society to progress economically is a very powerful moral value, I think. Consider this:

Under a capitalist system, even one as truncated and socialist as the one we have, economic progress is ever-present, even during period of slow-downs such as the one we have today. Wealth is introduced and distributed unequally – so when the wealthy enjoy, say, 2X% growth, the poor enjoy  1X or even half of X. But it is still a great thing, because while  the relative gap between the poor and rich increases in monetary terms, everybody's lifestyle improves. The modern American poor suffer from obesity as a problem. Centuries ago, the prevailing health issue was starvation.

Formally speaking – in terms of constant dollars – the wage of a poor man in today's America has not changed much over the last century (perhaps the economists on this forum can correct me if I am wrong!) - but the poor man in today's America has wealth available to him that'd make the Emperors of Rome weep in envy.

I would argue that this is a form of moral progress, too. People in today's world are healthier, and the have better access to food and knowledge and luxuries than at any time in human history. I think that reducing human suffering and making people happier is a human moral imperative.

Capitalist economists believe that in a condition of economic liberty, structures will emerge that, in the long run, will facilitate the movement towards an even greater prosperity for us all. It is true that it might seem this is not important – but perhaps that's because you are satisfied, in general ,with the level of prosperity you experience in person and in your community.

Contemplate people in India and tell me that it would not be a moral crime to bar them from achieving, for themselves, the sort of wealth you enjoy today. No? It would be?

If the economic growth inherent to capitalism continues apace, then eventually we will achieve a level of wealth that will allow us to look at modern America the same way we look today at the 18th century or at modern India. I don't see how it is not a moral value that modern society in that direction.

[Rudy Kohn]

Rudy:  Using England in the 18th century does not help much.  If I had to pick a crappy time to live as a laborer, 18th century England would not be it!  Maybe that is the difference.  I am not claiming that socialism will increase the economy, but I don't think economic progress is the most important ideal we should be striving for.  The societies that function like that are great, but only if you are doing well.  When you do poorly, there is no safety net.  You get the Great Depression and 18th century London.

It's important to note here that we're not choosing between everyone being fat and happy and a bunch of people being destitute.
The fact that growing English industry was able to employ those who would have previously fallen into a beggar/pariah class is a good thing.  Yes, their wages were low, but they elected to take the jobs rather than starve or steal.  Subsequently, their productivity increased and things got better for them.  (In the meantime, England was quickly moving from its position as one of a few powers to arguably the biggest mover and shaker in the world.)  Population growth and division of labor go hand-in-hand.  The laborers were soon able to raise their positions rather than starve (or steal) thanks to the jobs provided by capitalistic investment, as well as lower prices of goods resulting from larger supplies.  Large changes in the structure of production (e.g. the Industrial Revolution) do result in some people becoming short-term losers.  If they're industrious, they can get back on their feet and become productive again.

If the ideal is not high productivity, I would be curious as to what the ideal should be.  Happiness and humanity are not only subjective, but also only realizable through productivity.  There's no other way to raise everyone's standards of living.  Like I said before, every dollar of redistribution hurts twice.  I contend that it isn't the government's place to ensure everyone has a safety net.  It's our responsibility to provide our own safety nets.  Creating massive systems of entitlement results in moral hazard that hurts more than it helps.

Higher production and a system of voluntary exchange enables more people to meet their needs, and requires people to find ways to be productive.  Programs put in place to redistribute wealth may temporarily raise the standards of living of the beneficiary, but at the cost of destroying their drives to produce as well as the drives of those whose production has been taken.
It would be great if everyone would just work as hard as they can and donate everything they don't need to charity (and as Strings says, this can work okay in a tightly-knit group), but I'm strongly against codifying such a philosophy into law.  It would result in the collapse of civilization.  Steps toward such law has a lesser effect, but still, in my opinion, a negative one.

As far as humanity, I could argue that living under the thumb of an authoritarian state does little to enhance my humanity, no matter how fat and happy I am.  Would you call the Deltas in Brave New World exemplars of humanity?

Like I said in my earlier post, I'm curious as to what arguments brought you from a libertarian perspective to your current perspective.  I find myself unable to understand your opinions from a rational perspective.  I understand that you want unfortunate people to be taken care of and happy, and so do I, but my considered opinion is that the means you suggest are counterproductive in the long run. 

Despite our differences in opinion, I want to thank you for discussing this.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

you could indeed  but i take  your first hand observations and experiences much more seriously. its old fashioned of me i know but they are much more heavily weighted in my thinking than your hypothesis's.

[MicroBalrog]

ah, but you forget: I dedicated four years of my life to studying the lifes and experiences of people who lived centuries before me, and I just signed up to spend two more years doing the same, and am probably going to spend the rest of my life doing that.

I don't mean that it makes me smart, but then, if it's impossible to understand, say, the lifestyle of people a generation removed without experiencing it myself, by studying the documents and statistics and source of that era, then it would sort of make the whole study of History sort of pointless.

[Perd Hapley]

But socialism could work!  Never mind that capitalism, freedom and free markets are the engines that built the modern, prosperous West.  Socialism could work!  Never mind that socialism retards prosperity and progress all over the world.  Socialism could work! 

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

  mb   and your point?

[mellestad]

ah, but you forget: I dedicated four years of my life to studying the lifes and experiences of people who lived centuries before me, and I just signed up to spend two more years doing the same, and am probably going to spend the rest of my life doing that.

I don't mean that it makes me smart, but then, if it's impossible to understand, say, the lifestyle of people a generation removed without experiencing it myself, by studying the documents and statistics and source of that era, then it would sort of make the whole study of History sort of pointless.

I never made an argument from authority.  Someone told me I needed to visit post-communist/communist countries before I came to my opinions, I pointed out that I had.  Your education is great, and I listen to your opinion respectfully.  But I don't expect you to change your mind because many well educated social scientists are liberal, do I?  I do understand what you are saying though.  But if you want to compare based on modern social structures, how do you account for the fact that Scandinavian countries enjoy a higher rating on the human development index?  My point is not that socialism is a cure-all, but rather it is part of a balanced governmental structure.  In this discussion, I have seen the idea that it should be rejected completely, and I think that is a misguided idea.

Cassandra:  Arguing that someones opinion is invalid based on age/experience is not a reasonable tactic, and I would encourage you to avoid it.  1) You assume I lack experience and credentials 2) You should be debating my ideas on their own merit in the first place.  If I told you I had lived in China for twenty years, would that sway you?  I think not.  I don't require that you live in Sweden before you can prove me wrong.

Rudy: My ideal is roughly that of the Human Development Index.  Naturally, 'happiness' is subjective and very complex, but the HDI is a rough indicator that also takes economic factors into consideration.  Using that as a metric, it is clear that capitalism does not equal happiness.  Now please don't say I am claiming Communism makes people happy, my point is simply that system of government leaning more heavily towards socialism commonly show positive outcomes. 

I moved away from libertarianism because a) I think it makes ill-founded assumptions about human nature b) I have not seen an systems demonstrated that shows it works when given the kind of free reign many libertarians want.

a-expanded) I think you can show that human empathy declines in direct proportion to group size.  Libertarianism relies a great deal on the idea that free markets will eventually sort things out, but I think greed and blatant self interest overcome empathy at the level of a nation-state.  My argument would be that societies need rules to thrive.  Again, not Communist.  Here is a scale, you are here: --|------- I am here ----|---- Left is total free market, right is total State Control.

b) The examples so far of successful free-market societies are unconvincing to me.

This is getting circular though, and I am not going to drag this out endlessly.  Again, I think we all understand each other, and we are at an impasse.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

If I told you I had lived in China for twenty years, would that sway you?  I think not.

it might not sway me but it would give you, and by association your beliefs, more credibility. interestingly enough my dad married  very nice chinese lady and in her very large family so far none of them, and they have real world experience with socialism, is a fan of it.  its always seemed odd to me that the "socialist paradises" seem to require fences to keep their folks in, as opposed to restricting folksw like you from getting in to paradise.

[MicroBalrog]

, how do you account for the fact that Scandinavian countries enjoy a higher rating on the human development index?

Scandinavians live longer on average and have more children of school age [as a percentage] enrolled in schools.  Have you seen how the HDI is composed? It is comprised of four factors – adult literacy level (not being computed by official sources in any of the countries in question), GDP (purchaing power per capita, parity, life expectancy and a gross enrollment level [percentage of school-aged kids actually in schools].

GDP per capita is higher in the US than in any of those countries except for Norway. here is a link.  Adult literacy is AFAIK not offically computed in any of the nations in question. So only life expectancy and Gross Erolment remain as the factors in which said countries could really 'beat' America.

Because, in the United States, 2.2% of the total school-age population is being homeschooled, which is illegal in the Scandinavian countries, they're going to have an obvious edge in the gross enrolment ratio department. I do not see how this has anything to do with the quality of life in these countries. In fact I would say it makes the quality of life there worse, not better.

Furthermore, the United States has a lower life expectancy than the Scandinavian nations. It's possible that you're right and this is the result of the quality of health care in the US, however I would like to suggest that  the higher murder rate is also responsible.

I am not sure how any of those factors is a measure of 'happiness'.

P.S.

You have wondered into a long-standing debate between me and C&SD.

You see, CS&D is an older fellow than me, and has traveled the world and done a lot of things, and he feels that this is the main basis for judging the world and forming opinions. He feels, with some justification, that an extensive personal experience iis a superior form of learning the world than book learning.

I am far younger than CS&D, but I try to base my opinions based on my historical knowledge and by trying to gain as much theoretical knowledge on those issues on which  I pass judgement. I think that a person's private experience, though persuasive, is more anecdotal -  I don't, for example, use my experience with the Israeli health care system as an argument against public health care - and he plural of anecdote does not equal data, IMO.

So we often cross proverbial swords on this.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

and the insolent pup has been known to make some decent points   easily recognized since its at those times i agree with him
you will find that i never question md in those areas where he hasmore experience than me and only hesitantly in areas where hes got more schoolin. hes driven me to read up more than once

[RevDisk]

1)  Politics has been many things.  Quests for power, glory, wealth, control, whatever.  Politics is moreso about manipulating people than it is about moving resources from point A to point B.  I believe it often has less to do with the distribution of resources as it does with control over the distribution of resources. 

2) Taxes are not inherently socialist.  Social control and administration of the means of production is socialism, specially the unequal distribution of wealth and compensation according to work done.  True, it is widely held opinion, among capitalists and socialists, that socialism == high taxes, entitlement programs, etc.  This is not necessarily the case, just common enough that people automatically assume so.  I do love the nice false dichotomy you tossed in, very clever I must say and fairly smoothly delivered.  One can obey the Constitution and live in the modern world.  It is hard to imagine, as we've ignored much of the Constitution for so long, but it is entirely possible.

I must ask, you obviously have great disdain for the Constitution.  Would you prefer, in your preferred socialist America, to junk the entire Constitution, or just the parts you happen to dislike? 

3) Oddly, we have a member here from Sweden who would love to escape his socialist paradise for our evil capitalist empire of oppression and inequality.  Same with MicroBalrog too, oddly.  I met many folks from both examples you cited who wished to come to America.  I tried to always ask why, and the usual answer was "For a better life".  Funny, that.

As for socialism != collapse, socialism has only taken root since 1951 and progressed relatively slowly since.  Even communism lasted 70 years.  Socialism and communism are not the same thing, on paper.  In real world, they're not exactly unrelated.  Historically, there has been strong ties and much overlap between the two.  To claim that no such link exists would be disingenuous at best.

4) You are entitled to hold whatever opinion you wish.  I don't care for the juvenile insults like "libtard", "rethugs", "demorats" or the like.  In general, this board tries to discourage it.  But folks always come up with terms for folks they don't like.  It's not exactly dripping from every post, as you may have noticed.  Also, note that not a single person wants you banned.  Most posters are relatively eager to engage in a relatively civilized philosophical conversation, with a higher degree of reason and logic than is norm to the internet.  Perfection we ain't.  We're merely an armed polite society, by and by.

As for group-think, you obviously haven't read any of the 9mm vs 45 or Linux vs Mac vs Windows threads.  We have lawyers, German politicians, wacko libertarians, liberals, cops, geeks, grammar nazis, etc.  Just because we manage to get along in a relatively polite manner doesn't we all have the same opinion.

5) If you had a "libertarian phase", I'll be suitably impressed.  How long did it last?  Did you put in plenty of research and thought, or did you give it a passing glance?  I'm not being judgemental, I'm obviously not you so I don't know how serious you were about the matter.  Not saying you had have a shrine to Rand in your living room or whatnot, but it'd be hard to take your former libertarian "creds" seriously if it was a six month fad.

And gods damn it, they're dark green.  NOT black.  Green actually has better IR properties.  Some of us work with said "black helicopters" and prefer a bit of accuracy.


6) I'm a fan of the Constitution.  I encourage and support applying it to every American, regardless of race, gender, creed or any other indicator.  I've donated plenty of money to the EFF, which is the most effective civil rights organization in the US.  I suppose that's "social reform".  I do not consider creating inequality as social reform, which is what socialism is.  Socialism by definition is the unequal distribution of wealth and compensation according to work done.

I have encouraged RKBA folks to reach out to folks outside their normal niche.  But asking them to sell out their souls and their freedom to socialists would be a waste of time.  Socialists by definition wish to restrict freedom (granted, primarily economic freedom), not encourage it. 

Remember, our government is SOLELY granted abilities from the Constitution.  It specifically states that only matters specifically delineated in the Constitution are allowed to the federal government.  Everything else is reserved to the States or the people.  One of the major points of the Constitution was to prevent the tyranny of the masses.  Civil rights are not entitled to restriction from a 51% vote.  The Constitution doesn't GRANT any rights, only specifies some of the rights you are born with by virtue of being a human.  I fully realize this has not always been the implementation.  It took certain minorities and women many years to get the recognition they were entitled to from the day the Constitution was signed.  Those infringements are ENTIRELY due to people like yourself believing that civil rights can be infringed, if you just have enough votes.

Of course, I imagine to most of you I am still a horribly mis-guided, stupid, possibly evil, cretin.  So be it, I do not hold you to the same opinion even though we disagree on some politics.

To be fair...  We want to take nothing from you.  We don't want to take your money, your freedom, your liberties, your lifestyle, your opinions, nothing.  You desire to take from others involuntarily to give to those who have not earned it, restrict the economic freedom of others, restrict our lifestyles, etc.  I don't know if you'd like to take our civil liberties and opinions, but your contempt of the Constitution which protects said liberties and opinions is suggestive.  I'm glad you don't have those opinions towards us... But I'm not sure how you could think that we are misguided, stupid or evil when we wish you no harm nor wish to infringe any of your civil rights, liberties and freedoms. 

[Jamisjockey]

I don't care if I live longer, am healthier, or get a better education:  I'd rather have freedom. 

[Viking]

Sweden works well? Ahahahahahaha....hahahaha!
No, it doesn't. We have a large number of people living on welfare concentrated mainly in the suburbs-turning-ghetto areas of mainly the three largest cities, but the 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th is also having problems from what I've understood.

Good luck if you get sick with something not life threatening. Emergency care works, but not the other. The police force is so understaffed it's silly. Even cities with perhaps 50-70000 inhabitants are lucky to have 4-5 cops. Police stations are often closed. Most crimes such as burglary, assault, robberies (street robberies), rapes, arsons, vandalism etc go unsolved, and lots of the bank/cash deposit/armored car robberies goes unsolved as well. We had a rather spectacular one this morning, a bunch of robbers first stole a helicopter outside Stockholm, waltzed in to the airfield where the Stockholm Police Department keeps their 2 (of which one was away on maintenance) helicopters, planted a bomb/dummy bomb near it, took the stolen helicopter and landed it on the roof of a cash deposit. Good timing, considering that the 25th is generally the pay day for the entire country. It's currently not known how much they got away with, but "hundreds of millions of kronor" wouldn't be far fetched (ie atleast $12-13 million), and I seriously doubt the police will ever catch the ones responsible.

What else...oh yes, if you are retired, perhaps going a bit senile and live in an assisted living home? Ye gods have mercy on you. You've probably worked your entire life, paid enormous amounts of taxes, and you get jack *expletive deleted*it for your troubles. After all, we get 100.000 new "swedes" each year that we have to support, and the old folks are senile anyway, so they won't complain. The ones that we aren't supporting here we are instead sending countless millions to in futile attempts to help them build up their nations. I won't hold my breath waiting for it to happen :rolleyes:.

What else...oh, while the rest of Europe have been enjoying such sinful things as privately run pharmacies (which we HAD until 1970 or so, but the government at that time obviously had to stick their nose where it didn't belong), we are currently de-regulating it, to much wailing and gnashing of teeth from the socialist scum. Personally I'm going to go out and buy a pack of aspirin from my nearest grocery store once that market has been de-regulated just to celebrate. Now if we could only get rid of the government monopoly on selling booze, wine and beer above 3.5 ABV...

Oh, forgot schools. They mostly suck, atleast the public. The independent schools (which are funded by school vouchers) have an extraordinarily good reputation though. I figure such things as classes small enough that the teacher can make sure that everyone gets the attention needed has something to do with it.

What else...oh yes, no respect for victims of crime, which to me is a symptom of the willy-nilly socialism gone rampant, where people of undefined qualifications try to shift the blame from the criminal to "the system", "institutional racism", "police brutality" and other poor excuses. The few rapists who are arrested seldom see much time behind bars, and if they are between 15 and 18 (sometimes even as much as 15 and 21) they get reduced sentences "because of their young age". Those under 15 can't be punished at all, not even for raping, torturing and murdering. How's that for a justice system?
This also reflects in the fact that while self defence is legal in theory, they WILL find a way to hang you for it. The law states that you are allowed to use "reasonable amounts of force". The definition of "reasonable" is left to the court. Now what can go wrong when you have a bunch of people who are out of touch with reality trying to decide if I acted reasonably when I cracked open some robbers head with my baton? No chance for 20/20 hindsight from THEM, right, nor is there any chance for them being high and mighty and expecting me to act according to their expectations (which probably comes down to either "running", "taking it up the ass", or "reasoning". Running is often not an option, I will not bend over to scum, and I won't even consider reasoning with rabid animals).

Still want to live here? The ghetto areas are particularly fine this time of year, what with all the burning cars, broken windows and such. You will probably not get robbed more than once or twice, and your girlfriend and daughters will adapt to being called whores, sluts, skanks, f*ckin whitey/Swede, f*cking Christian and other such lovely names.

[Balog]

I was wondering when the Viking was going to chime in on how well Sweden is doing. 

[Viking]

I was wondering when the Viking was going to chime in on how well Sweden is doing. 

I can't resist speaking out when I read such foolishness.
I could've gone on a bit further as well, didn't mention say our armed forces for example. I think I share the feelings of those who saw the writing on the wall back in 38-39, when our then Prime minister declared that "our preparations are good"...they weren't, and they aren't now, and now I'm wondering when the Russians are going to find a reason to take over Gotland, citing our lack of will and strenght to protect that future gas pipeline that is being laid from Russia to Germany...as the Arctic Star incident showed, we aren't exactly world champions in responding to potential threats or emergency situations...

[mellestad]

...

That makes more sense, thanks for pointing out the reasoning behind the the stuff between you and Cass!

Honest question, not trying to fight: Is the murder rate really that much of an influence on mortality?  US is around 5-6 per 100k, I imagine Switzerland is below 1 per 100k.  I am not into statistics, but even if those murders were all occurring at young ages I wouldn't think it would do much to the overall statistical life expectancy.  My guess (pulled from nowhere) would be that American have a more unhealthy lifestyle.  More fatty food, less exercise, more smoking.  Again, total conjecture and curiosity here.

The HDI is very crude, as you know.  If we want to get into subjective happiness, the US rarely falls into the top ten:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/lif_lif_sat-lifestyle-life-satisfaction
http://www.le.ac.uk/users/aw57/world/sample.html

Again, my point is that the US is not the #1 nation in the world on many, many things and so my point would be that it is hard to use our success as a justification for anti-socialism, when socialism can obviously work very well for its citizens.

Rev:
Disdain for the constitution?  Only if you make the assumption that every Supreme court in recent history has 'great disdain' for the constitution.  The constitution is not a divinely inspired document, it was created by a political process using existing data and flavored with compromise.  I doubt there has been an American government who operated purely based on the Constitution in over 200 years.  Again, I have to point out that not agreeing with you politically does not mean I hate the country and everything you believe in.

Out of curiosity, how long should I have been a libertarian before I have the credentials to discuss it with you?  My libertarian phase was probably for  ~ two years.  However, if I had never had any libertarian phase I would still feel justified in discussing about it.  From my perspective, that was two years I spent being misguided and my energy was wasted for an ideal I now think is unsupportable.

Dark green...I will remember that!

About The Viking's post:
This is why I don't like using anecdotal evidence.  If we polled 100 Swedes and 100 Americans, the Swedes would be happier with their government, on average than the Americans.  Individual opinion, while useful, is too biased to make an informed decision on public policy.  If I was on a foreign politics board and I got all of my opinions about America from Michael Moore without any other empirical investigation, how do you think I would react to American policy?  I value The Vikings time, but I can easily find people who love Sweden, or Americans who hate America so when I am making decisions about what political process to champion, I have to use my head more than my heart.

[MicroBalrog]

Only if you make the assumption that every Supreme court in recent history has 'great disdain' for the constitution. 

I call it "educated knowledge".

Many of the recent courts were explicitly guided by doctrines other than a respect for the Constitution's original intent.

The constitution is not a divinely inspired document, it was created by a political process using existing data and flavored with compromise. 

So are all laws. Would you argue we should creativel interpret the law when it suits are?

THe Constitution is law. It's not just a set of vague guidelines, nor is it an a la carte menu.

[mellestad]

I call it "educated knowledge".

Many of the recent courts were explicitly guided by doctrines other than a respect for the Constitution's original intent.

So are all laws. Would you argue we should creativel interpret the law when it suits are?

THe Constitution is law. It's not just a set of vague guidelines, nor is it an a la carte menu.

Man, you are fast!

Saying that ignores the history of American jurisprudence though.  If it were as clear as that, no-one would be having this discussion, because Judges would have tended to keep things on a tighter reign.  Government, the constitution and laws are all 'living' things.  Again, this is a political point on which people disagree, not a black and white problem where everyone who disagrees is wrong.  Granted, if you are a strict constitutionalist you surely disagree with me there!

I probably won't be able to post more today.  Been fun!

[Viking]

Huh? I'm not happy with my government now, but I would be even less happier with the other option, whom I consider more vile, evil and horrifying than Sauron and Obama combined. You think I would be happy with even MORE taxation on gas?
Even more taxes being taken from my pay check? More public sector jobs that produce jack *expletive deleted*it? I've heard of places in the public sector over here where the problem isn't as much burnout as it is "bore out". They collect their pay checks without doing anything specific, and are in some cases not only allowed, but encouraged to create their own tasks! Why the HELL should I pay for parasites like that? Think I like that?

Think I like even more people continuing to live on welfare while I bust my ass off working? Think I'm happy with being bled dry by a thousand cuts in the form of money for worthless artists who should get a haircut and a real job? Think I want even more money to be thrown at the worthless parasitic humans in the ghettos who think that car burning is a valid form of expressing themselves?

News for you, I don't! My money is being taken, and I feel that I get less and less for it in compensation. Considering the tax rates over here, I should have f*cking excellent police service, better medical service, and armed forces that could reasonably expect to defeat a more fearsome enemy than a Girl Scout troop, and countless of other things. What I get isn't even mediocre police service, call the local hospital and they'll call back when possible and I might get an appointment, and our armed forces would have something more to show for the 40-50 billion or so krona that we spend on them per annum.

If all of these things and the rest worked, I would probably still be unhappy about the money being STOLEN from me, but I would grudgingly admit that it works and I atleast get good compensation for it, but now I'm not merely unhappy, I'm seething with anger and rage and I want to repeatedly punch people in the face with a brick.

Most people that I discuss with on Swedish forums, even the ones who voted for the current administration, aren't fond of them, but feel the same as me, the current is bad, the alternative is not an option for any of them. Hell, even many of those who DIDN'T vote for the current administration fears and abhors the other alternative. While they may be social democrats, they aren't indoctrinated in their current ideas, which seems to be a broken record playing only "raise taxes, increase public sector, make sure you are able to collect unemployment forever, blabla". That if anything should tell you what many people over here feel. If the opposition takes control in the next election, I'm leaving the country post haste...

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

You say STOLEN as if he should care.  He's made it clear that he doesn't have a problem stealing from you.

[MicroBalrog]

Saying that ignores the history of American jurisprudence though.

On the contrary, this draws upon the history of American jurisprudence. Now, I know that the ords 'activist judges' are abused as all get-out by anybody who sees a decision they won't like, but it's true that judges like Oliver Wendell Holmes, Louis Brandeis, and some of their descendants and successors, subscribed to a view wherein the intent of the founders counted for little, and that the constitution can be freely reinterpreted in light of social progress.

Now, you may like the concept of a living constitution – but you cannot at once say you adhere to the constitution meaning and reinterpret it freely. Maybe it would be better for the nation – I can certainly not say, for I am not a US citizen -  if the American judiciary stuck b judicial activism as a doctrine. But you cannot lay a claim to both adhering a constitution and to reinterpreting it freely, at once. That is a logical contradiction.

A very good book on this subject – although of course biased, since it is written by a Cato-affiliated expert!  - is “How the Progressives Re-Wrote the Constitution”, by Richard Epstein of the University of Chicago.

[Balog]

I'd imagine if you polled 100 looters on welfare from America and Sweden, the Nordic parasites would be far happier.

[Viking]

I'd imagine if you polled 100 looters on welfare from America and Sweden, the Nordic parasites would be far happier.

I'm not sure actually. Aren't there states that offer you massive handouts if you pop out a bunch of sprogs? Aren't there places in the US where some families are currently on the third generation of welfare? While we do have an extensive welfare system here, the massive handouts I've read about (Preacherman wrote about this on his blog just the other day, $500 per month and child in handouts ) don't exist here. OTOH, we do have "free" medical care and whatnot...guess it evens out...

[Balog]

I'm not sure actually. Aren't there states that offer you massive handouts if you pop out a bunch of sprogs? Aren't there places in the US where some families are currently on the third generation of welfare? While we do have an extensive welfare system here, the massive handouts I've read about (Preacherman wrote about this on his blog just the other day, $500 per month and child in handouts ) don't exist here. OTOH, we do have "free" medical care and whatnot...guess it evens out...

Aren't your universities free as well? All those "students" living on the dole...

[Viking]

Aren't your universities free as well? All those "students" living on the dole...

Universities are free yes, but fortunatly most of the dole money has to be repaid.
Quite a lot of people do get worthless degress though. I guess they end up at the local McDonald's or somesuch. Who would've imagined that their 6 years of gender studies, women's studies, feminist philosophy, comparative folk dancing and other Mickey Mouse-subjects would be so undesirable? Woe be upon them, guess they should've gone with engineering, or nursing, or accounting or whatnot :rolleyes:.