Forum Replies Created
It’s not the responsibility of the government to provide “living wages” or fix prices. Doing that restricts our freedom to enter into agreements in our own “best interests,” besides distorting the economy and adding inefficiencies and increased costs.
Fine if there are programs to help the poor, so long as it doesn’t keep the poor dependent and a reliable voting block.
The Socialists today want the same thing the Socialists yesterday wanted–their own power, prestige, and wealth while using the masses as their props and stooges. If we get Bernie-Socialism, things will go better for SOME PEOPLE, namely those in power and their friends and those in the system. The masses will suffer, but might be convinced to take some solace in seeing some rich people be brought down a peg or two.
We are rich enough to provide a “safety net,” but we shouldn’t base an economy on controlling prices and handing out lots free stuff. Free college, for example, will simply be a scam for those in the education system, pushing courses and degrees that will ultimately be of little use in our economy, except for the lining the pockets of the government workers involved.
Capitalism isn’t perfect, but it’s the fairest means of rewarding labor and distributing goods and services. A coercive economy will lead to waste and corruption. We won’t be any better off with Bernie and his free lunches.
It’s time to move on. You’re not going to overturn an election won fair and square. It has to be at the ballot box.
There was no collusion. Take Trump out by some other means. Better yet, run a good candidate against him instead of trying to overturn an election won fair and square (fought against a candidate and liberal media not fighting fairly and squarely).