happy America-is-now-Communist day

well, Bob Barr didn't win. He had no chance, so I don't know why I was hoping. But I do know that we are on the path to socialism. Barack Obama's distribution of wealth plan could be problematic. With this plan, a hobo could technically earn more money than a teacher. So my question is, why not just be hobos and get free money? Where is the American incentive to work? One of the reasons why capitalism works so well is because of the incentive to work.

If a hobo who is on welfare makes 0 dollars, and a teacher not on welfare makes 38,000 dollars annually are in this situation, the hobo will make more money. After Obama has the government take 15,000 from the teacher, and more money on taxes, the teacher will be left with almost nothing and the hobo will be spending the teacher's money, presumably on alcohol.

My solution: let's all become hobos and then we'll be rollin in the dough. Comments?


  1. M. L. Keene5/11/08 16:13

    You don't know what you're talking about please! Just listen to what he has to say. He is not a Communist by any stretch of the imagination! Do you understand what that means? You know, overthrow by the proletariat and all that fun stuff? He is mildly socialist, but in good way (not that I believe you can be socialist in a bad way). Please, listen to what he is saying! He is increasing taxes for people who make a LOT of money and decreasing taxes for people who don't make as much. We are talking about really high upper class people relieving some of the stress from the middle class, to keep the middle class -- the largest class in our nation -- in tact. He does not want to take money from middle class people's money and give it to people who don't work!
    Beyond this, it comes down to an essential and fundamental ideological principle. Socialism and communism are not about giving money to lazy people. That's American propaganda (because no, we are not perfect). It's not about how hard you work. Try telling a coal miner he doesn't work very hard. Coal miners work very hard, but they barely get paid anything. It's about the idea that every job needs to be done and nobody should get anymore because they happen to have a higher status job.

  2. there is a low demand for coal miners and anyone can do that
    that's why they get paid less. doesn't matter if it's hard. Maybe if people went to school there would be more demand for coal miners because those that would have been coal miners would be doctors. That would create a low demand for doctors. Whoa, total class shift. Not saying that's gonna happen but imagine what would happen if it did?

  3. and they should get more money if they studied more to get a good paying job. It's called capitalism. Incentive to work. American dream. The dream is gone if everyone gets a bus driver salary. Life's not fair and that's a good thing.

  4. M. L. Keene5/11/08 16:53

    Skills are not determined by education only. Not everybody can be a doctor. A coal miner was just an example. The whole communist movement started because factory workers did have to work much harder than their bosses. I don't think you understand.
    Oh and "is loving how liberals think they're better at economics than her. Good job screwing America over." I'm sorry, but why are you an expert on economics?

  5. facebook statii are irrelevant to this blog

  6. M. L. Keene5/11/08 16:59

    Haha hardly. Whatever, all I'm saying is, you don't know everything. I just want you to understand what you're talking about before you tear all these ideas down that people have thought about for centuries. I apologize if I was rude.

  7. I am fully aware I don't know everything
    allow me to draw a diagram... just kidding
    I understand what I am talking about. If you vote for Obama that means you agree with socialism, abortion, terrorists, and unconstitutional taxation

  8. Anonymous5/11/08 17:12

    I agree that although while being a coal miner or whatever may be "harder" you didn't study 4-6 extra years to become a coal miner. I could- at age 15 work at McDonalds (not that there's anything wrong with that), it's just not a high-paying job because a 15 year old could do it. Taking MORE money from higher-income people may cause you to be like- oh, only 3% more, big deal; but THEY earned that money, THEY worked for it,THEY made it on their own. Most rich people give to charity regardless. So, why give money to people who arn't getting anywhere- who arn't trying. There are people for example having their 3rd child to stay on welfare! Are they trying to have a better life? Let's just give them more money from educated rich people. Helping people in need is great- I should hope no one would debate that, but when you're giving money to people who misuse it- that's wrong. Capitalism or Socialism? What about the "American Dream," becoming "someone," spreading the wealth doesn't promote individualism- it's not at all what this country's economy was ever based on. If X has a better product than Y,-> X makes more money, Y fails. It's Y's own fault they didnt have a better product. Again, capitalism is based on competition which is better than giving someone with the better product some of X's money.

  9. Anonymous5/11/08 18:58

    (It's Andrew Settle from camp.. and facebook.. and everything else... :D)Surprised?

  10. Anonymous5/11/08 19:13

    You're stupid. You can't interchangeably switch the forms of government socialism and communism because they're different. Also socialism is for the people to own the means of production at the base- you hardly know socialism. The socialist candidate for president even called Obama the farthest thing from a socialist.

    Do you hate muslims? Wtf does anything Obama have to do with relate to terrorism?

    Unconstitutional taxation??? wow.

    Also all rich people are not more educated than poorer people. You also have no basis to claim that people are poor because they don't "try" or work hard; nor that most rich people give to charity.

  11. M.L. Keene5/11/08 19:40

    "If you vote for Obama that means you agree with socialism, abortion, terrorists, and unconstitutional taxation"
    ...I'm sorry, but that's bull...

    =D Thank you Mr... Anonymous

  12. Andrew wins this argument.
    This is my blog, I have the right to put whatever the hell I want up here. Don't tell me not to write something because you don't agree with it. I won't say that to you.

  13. and no
    there are terrorists of every religion
    one of my best friends is muslim
    one of the terrorists Obama had to his house was a DOMESTIC TERRORIST
    as in not Muslim and from the USA

  14. Anonymous5/11/08 21:57

    Andrew wins because you agree with him. Don't tell me what I can and can't say because this IS A BLOG. And in that manner it is a public forum.

    Also you're basically calling all "hippies" or anti-war protesters of the time terrorists. His organization never killed anyone.

  15. terrorists: people who cause tragedies in a community to cause fear. AKA bombings, crap like that.

    I never told you what you can and cannot say. I'm just saying that I agree with Andrew, because in all honesty, what he's saying makes a lot more sense.

    If you would like to bash me you may start your own blog called "kcisnotawesome.blogspot.com"

  16. Anonymous6/11/08 09:32

    I understand that- however you percieve what he did as "evil" while other do not. Also then, most governments are terrorist organizations.

    I didn't tell you not to write anything either.

    No, I really would just like to comment on what you have to say.

  17. ok
    I do consider that terribly socialist of Obama. I would love to have a black president, I just wish it wasn't Obama.

  18. Anonymous6/11/08 16:16

    Okay, well I already disagreed with the fact you call him socialist- because even the socialist candidate for president said he wasn't at all on top of the fact he doesn't have anything planned remotely like socialism.

    Also I never said I thought you didn't like him because he was black.

  19. Silence Dogood6/11/08 18:40

    Why can't we all just get along?

  20. Libertarians will never agree with liberals. Ever. That's just the way it is. I'm just trying to express my opinion with this blog.

  21. Anonymous7/11/08 12:23

    Your joking of course.

  22. Silence Dogood7/11/08 17:10

    All I'm saying is give peace a chance...

  23. Anon... who are you to define my tone?

    Silence... I never said I didn't get along with liberals, I just don't agree with many of their beliefs. I have some really good friends who are liberal.

  24. Silence Dogood8/11/08 16:34

    That's Ms. Dogood to you young lady C=
    But in any case, I wasn't directing it at anyone in particular, just in general.