The debate has gotten so muddled, and so crammed with ideological rhetoric, that people seem to have forgotten that things like Social Security are 'safety nets' designed by the original framers for the WORKING CLASS.

The WORKING CLASS 'paid' into the fund, and derived the benefits. Now we hear that people who do not work are entitled to rob a fund they did not contribute to.

Who perpetrated this fraud?

There is a distinct difference between rights, which we all share in common, and entitlements, which should be held exclusively by those who are eligible.

Who is responsible for robbing those who are eligible to provide for those who are not? And who is responsible for calling this robbery a 'right' ??? Oh yeah .. the Commie-crats.

What would the Founding Fathers say? They'd say nothing. They simply would not clothe, feed, or shelter those who demanded the 'right' to a free ride on the backs of those who are productive. And, yeah, they'd shoot anyone who tried to rob them to do just that. The Founding Fathers were real big on the issue of private property, including the right to hold earnings and wages above unfair taxation.

Unfair taxation is, after all, the reason why they became the Founding Fathers.

Well stated article! In fact so well written I've saved it for future reference!
I MUST comment on the previous comment, though. Athling wrote: "The debate has gotten so muddled, and so crammed with ideological rhetoric, that people seem to have forgotten that things like Social Security are 'safety nets' designed by the original framers for the WORKING CLASS."
Sorry Athling, but Social security was NOT a 'safety net' designed by the original framers! It was not enacted until the WWII era - by FDR - who with many of his socialistic policies was in direct violation of the beliefs of the original framers. The Founders of this nation were against income redistribution - regardless of how it was deceptively presented to the populace. The Founders believed that the backbone of this nation was the hard work and individual rights of the citizens. Note that the Declaration of Independence does not guarantee happiness - it guarantees the "..right to...the PURSUIT of happiness." That means if you want to work for it you have the right to have it.....but the government has NO obligation to provide happiness whether that be in the form of work or housing or food or medical care - or even recreation. We have long ago abandoned our Constitution. And unless and until we return to following it - as it was written - we are in big, big trouble!
The entitlement society in which we live now would so anger our esteemed Founders.

While I admire almost any call for welfare reform, I wish it was done in some other way this time. Walter Williams has a poor grasp of historical analysis and an even weaker ability to make analogies. For example, there is the notion of freedom to travel. If you use a road, sidewalk, bike path, trail, take a train, boat, plane car or bus, then the government is subsidizing your freedom to travel. To a lesser extent, our freedom of speech and to travel requires that we co-operate at some level. Otherwise, we keep crashing into each other and shouting in each other’s ears. William then makes the disturbing insinuation about intimidation, threats and coercion. The implication is clearly about taxation which is one of congress’s major powers as well as a major resource. Furthermore, without arguing the fine points of ‘Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness’, John Locke was in favor of a tax system and so were virtually all of our founding fathers. Finally, it’s not three fifths to two third but 100% of the federal budget that comes from the people and is used at the governments discretion. It’s not stealing and it’s not a sin even though it is, to one extent or another, the redistribution of wealth.

The real truth for our nation is that any politician who holds the values of liberty that our founders held would probably be quite comfortable seeing Walter as a slave.

Athling the mis-informed strikes again.

Don't you get sick of embarassing yourself?

So, what are you proposing... that if someone wants to go to their grandmother's house in Ohio that they build their own road? That the entire Federal Budget exists solely for "Defense?" (Notwithstanding that we wildly overspend for "defense" irregardless of Eisenhower's warnings about the military-industrial complex upon his leaving of office.)

Do you think that we are unfairly taxed, even though our federal budget, thanks to BUSH's policies, is spending FAR more money each year than it takes in?

If you do, then you're obviously supporting the wrong party.

Bill Clinton, who obviously is one of your heroes based upon the tenets of your post, submitted federal budgets that spent FAR less than the government took in in taxes.

Bush of course, is a record-setting tax-and-spend thief, by your definition.

Funny, I never woulda figured you for a Bubba Clinton kind of guy.

Litl Bits ... when I said original framers, I meant just that ... the original framers of the Social Security Act, not the Original Framers of the Constitution.

This act was put into place because FDR, the great commie-crat, capped coal prices and plunged the Coal miners into corporate slavery. The Unions hated FDR with a passion, so this bill was passed to buy them off.

The original bill was simply a suppliment to defray medical costs after retirement. Since then, and thanks to Eisenhower, the act was extended to everyone ... and everyone has since viewed it as an entitlement.

Sox .. stick a sock in it. Clinton underfunded the military, which is why there aren't enough flack vests, or humvee armor. Clinton did sign off on NAFTA ... so who's kidding who here?

As too Bush spending too much money? Thanks to you commie-crats, we poured a bundle into the tsunami relief for Indonesia, despite their radical Muslim hatred for the US. And, when you consider how much you commie-crats blow off on the UN every year paying for foreign abortion clinics, while raping SSN, who's the hypocrit?

And, yes, it was LBJ, the greatest commie-crat since FDR, who opened the SSN funds to finance all of this liberal BS that started the deficit plunge.

You commie-crats always blow off a fortune then complain when someone else has to balance the budget ... not easy with a war going on. And it wasn't Bush who started this mess ... good ole Jimmie Carter created this mess, with the help of the Commie-crat Congress.

Sooner or later the American People have to pay the price for stupid politicians. But whiners like you, Sox, never want to pay out of your own wallet ... always someone else's. You view that kind of theft as an 'entitlement' and call it a 'right'. So much for Progressive Liberals.

Funny how liberals try so hard to sound smart, yet they have to ruin their well-thought out arguement with made-up words like "irregardless"...and they make fun of President Bush for the same thing. Give it up SoxSweepAgain...you are no smarter than Yogi Bera (and I assume by your ID you are not a Yankees fan) or President Bush (and I also assume by your ridiculous diatribe you are not a fan of his either!)

Athling, anyone who would demonize FDR, who ably guided us through the second world war, with a late assist by another great DEMOcrat, Truman, is a revisionist ass-suck. Which you are.

IRREGARDLESS, cinnamongirl, you made no points, just stuck in with an insult, showing that you are another suck-and-spit victim of the Neocon Media.

Do you swallow?

Athling, there wouldn't be a NEED for "flak vests" if your worshipped Bushie-boy hadn't blundered into a false war in Iraq. Remember the "Peace Dividend" that Reagan spoke of? Oh, forgot- you guys gave up Reagan when you got a chance to crusade against Muslim ass with an attack on Iraq even though Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11.

Great job with Osama, you idiots... thanks to your guys' idiotic and lethal attack on Iraq, we didn't have the troops available to catch him, and he's still sending out his little threats from his cave.

Of course, you all are so TERRIFIED of a man in a cave that you're willing to give up your Constitutional rights to catch the wild-haored scurrying freak.

By the way, Athling, you're lying- it's obvious you thought that the original framers of the Constitution had a provision for Social Security. Nice try on backing off your ignorance.

I know this, because I have read your juvenile, anti-American/Pro-Bushie-boy posts, and I see that you are a fake American patriot, and a true American redneck nationalist red-state clod-hopping fascist=promoter, COMRADE.

I'm a little drunk.

But after today's Abramoff crap, and today's 9/11 crap, all lies, I can't type straight.

How can intelligent people support this CRIMINAL????????????

Tell me Sox ... given your vocabulary and IQ level ... you did grow in a pay toilet, right?

Can't you read Sox??? When I said 'original framers' I meant original framers of the Act, not the Constitution. I believe I explained that above. When someone frames an act, they are the original framers. Get it???

Calling me sissy names again Sox? I did ask you to tell me what branch of the military you've served in. You've never answered that question. But, then again, you commie-crats equate cowardice with patriotism.

As to me demonizing FDR? Get real. If you had ever belonged to a real union ... not one of those phoney Fed unions ... you'd know the real truth about FDR and his Progressive Lib buddies.

They capped the coal prices, sold the coal miners into corporate slavery, then heavily invested in those slave operations and made a fortune ... the same tired old New England Progressive Lib scam.

Me demonize Truman? Oh, you mean the guy who gave away half of Korea after Americans shed blood liberating the whole country? You mean the guy who restored the commies and insured that the current nut case ruler would be playing nuclear roulette?

Yeah, you Progressive Libs really have an impressive score sheet ... and you always fly off the handle when someone exposes you.

Your rhetoric is simple ... you want to live out of everyone else's wallet. You want to get rich on slave labor the way FDR did. And you really hope everyone is stupid enough to keep believing your BS.

Sorry Sox ... the people on this site actually read history and actually know how to think and see through the Progressive Liberal BS ... code word meaning 'progressively into someone else's wallet, and liberal with someone else's money'.

Athling, you're a brainwashed tool.

Truman and Roosevelt were great men who guided this country out of the Depression, incepted the civil rights movement, and ended World War.

Your boys, Bush, Nixon, et al., can't hold a candle to these great Americans. Do you really believe that it's Truman's fault that Korea was split, or do you think it would have been a good idea to go to war with China and Russia? Are you that clueless???

As for getting rich on "slave labor," buddy, you exhibit EXACTLY how clueless you are. The "Red States" form a map that almost exactly matches what used to be known as "Slave Territory."

Tool.

Wow, what a thread. First off MikeR, not all of the founding fathers were slave owners, matter of fact the three fifths clause was put in by the framers to deny southern slave owning states who were gameing the electoral system, less representation in Congress, and fewer electoral votes for President. Also, people traveled quite frequently and sometimes easily before the interstate highway sytem, in fact most roads were built by private citizens back in colonial times, in other words, they did for themselves without Congress haveing to take any money for them. What Thomas Locke and the founders were talking about was fair taxation by Congress, or no taxation without representation. That doesn't include Ponzi scheme social security scams or welfare and WIC checks.
Also Sox, the emancipation proclomation was signed by a Republican President, and the voting rights and civil rights acts of 1964 only passed because the Republicans, who were a minority in both houses, voted overwhelmingly for them. I believe the vote ratio was 60% Democrat to over 90% Republican. Roosevelt didn't guide this country out of the Depression, after 8 years of the New Deal Americans tax burden had tripled and unemployment was still at 20%. Private sector commerce and industry got us out of the depression, not "New Deal" socialism. Oh, Sox, since you don't know the duties of the offices of the people you vote for, Congress has budget oversight. Clinton vetoed 11 spending bills before a Republican controlled Congress balanced the budget in the 90's, something the Democrats failed to do when they controlled it the previous 40 years.

Sox ... I'm clueless?

You are a laugh a second ... or is that a joke a second?

Go to war with China and Russia in Korea? Sox, the Chinese were already in the fight and we kicked the crap out of them ... or haven't you read HISTORY? And why would the Russians want to go to war with us after Truman nuked Japan? We had the bomb, they didn't, and they weren't that crazy.

The simple fact is Truman was a Commie-crat who facilitated socialist dictatorships throughout Europe and Asia, as per FDR's master plan. And now north Korea is a menace ... thank you mr. Truman.

This started as a debate over SSN. The simple fact is that we would not have had SSN if FDR hadn't enslaved the coal miners in the first place. Without that slavery, the unions would have forced living wages. But, with the coal prices being capped, the slave wages mandated SSN as a buy off for the unions. After all, we have to keep the slaves alive long enough to profit from them.

As to the red states being slave states ... what a joke. You are seriously demented trying to push that tripe on public site where people actually know history and how to think. Your version of history probably flies well with other Libs who are doped up when they embrace that BS.

By the way ... there were slave free zones down south. By contrast, New York City was pro slavery ... 'Copperheads'.

And don't call me 'buddy', Sox. I'm a Marine who has no use for Commie-crat traitors who rewrite history to pedal socialist BS.

But it's not your fault Sox ... you were brain washed by the Commie-crat republic of Boston, so you never had a chance ... poor little whimp ... never to grow up, and never to be a man ... and always crying for his 'Mommy-state' to hold his poor wittle hand.

I never said that all our founding fathers were slave owners. I said that they were probably comfortable with slavery. My entire point is not the merit of subsidized care, but rather that Walter Williams makes very poor analogies. On a side note, this was one great thread.

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: