Mormon vs Trump

[NeuroTypical]

36 minutes ago, Lost Boy said:

Or maybe doing a universal health care will just get everyone covered and decrease the cost for most americans.

Can you name one single time our government took something over and stuff got cheaper?

 

Edited November 28, 2018 by NeuroTypical

[Tyme]

I agree the church is in favor the Constitution, against communism and for freedom. As am I. Communism and socialism aren't antithesis to freedom and the Constitution. It's an economic system that has never worked. It didn't even work when JS implemented it through God. It was a disaster. But stating that the United Order and city of enoch aren't communism-esque is you in denial. Like MormonGator said you don't want to believe it because it goes against your personal beliefs.

Edited November 28, 2018 by Tyme

[Lost Boy]

1 hour ago, NeuroTypical said:

Can you name one single time our government took something over and stuff got cheaper?

 

https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20110920.013390/full/

Honestly, how many things has government taken over?  Very few things and mostly what they did take over were things that essentially needed bailing out like rail roads, particularly amtrak.  Am I wrong here?  Please provide examples of things the government took over and ran more poorly.

[clbent04]

On 11/27/2018 at 1:40 PM, The Folk Prophet said:

Silly me. Here I am thinking legal abortion, socialism, pro gay marriage, feminism, etc were left wing principles.

I suppose you're going to try and convince me the "leftists" aren't really "leftists" because they're really conservative right leaning and the "far left" have just made their conservative leftist views just seem like conservative views because they're conservative but they're not really conservative because they've proclaimed themselves "left" leaning --- or....some muddled up explanations.

Well, okay then. If they legitimately want to support conservative ideals and just call themselves "leftist" then great! Let's all vote for moral, conservative principles and call ourselves whatever we want.

If, on the other hand, they call themselves leftists because the support "leftist" ideals that are immoral to me then I don't particularly care whether you think they're "far" left or not. It's not the people I stand against. It's the principles.

Abortion is evil.

Socialism is evil.

Gay marriage is evil.

Feminism (as it currently stands) is evil.

Disarming the populace and having open borders and allowing the government to bureaucratically micromanage aspects of our lives, and all that jazz is just stupid...and stupid is a kind of evil, but less directly.

I don't care whether you label these things "left" or "far left" (though the idea that these things are not core to the left is silly to me). I care about principles of good and evil.

If you want to "win" the argument by claiming that these things are not inherent to the left -- great. Meaningless. But great.

Well, actually, saying that if and when there is racism on the right that it's evil would be pretty accurate.

However, when some leftist claims I'm "racist" for opposing affirmative action or that I'm a chauvinist for my view of women's roles based on my religion, I somehow don't feel like it's the same as my claiming that abortion is morally despicable.

Don't talk about religion or politics they say...  Talk about them at the same time!

 

Edited November 29, 2018 by clbent04

[Guest MormonGator]

1 minute ago, clbent04 said:

Don't talk about religion or politics they say... 

My mom told me to never discuss politics and religion. Sadly, it didn't stick. 

[clbent04]

20 minutes ago, Lost Boy said:

Please provide examples of things the government took over and ran more poorly.

2017 Net Profit

United States Postal Service      

-$2,700,000,000 (NEGATIVE amount)

UPS                                                

$3,400,000,000 (POSITIVE amount)

FedEx                                                   

$3,000,000,000 (POSITIVE amount)

[mirkwood]

Hmmmm....sounds like the Constitution is a little more important than some want to believe.  

 

 

President George Albert Smith stated: "I am saying to you that to me the Constitution of the United States of America is just as much from my Heavenly Father as the Ten Commandments." (April 1948 General Conference)

Reiterating the importance of the Constitution, President David O. McKay said, and then Elder L. Tom Perry repeated:
“Next to being one in worshiping God there is nothing in this world upon which this Church should be more united than in upholding and defending the Constitution of the United States.” (Truth and Liberty. BYU, Sept. 1987)

Unfortunately, sometimes we think this is engaging in politics. President Joseph F. Smith had something to say in those regards:
There has been a tendency among some Latter-day Saints, even when the Constitution is mentioned, to say, ‘There he goes talking politics.’ I am not talking politics. I am quoting the words of the Lord.” (Joseph F. Smith CR April 1946)
 

[mirkwood]

You edited your comment.  Joseph Smith did not implement communism.  That is false doctrine.  He tried to implement the LOC/United Order.

Back to the City of Enoch. 

No, it wasn't communist-esque.  It was Law Of Consecration-esque.  You have never, nor will you, see the words communism and socialism used as examples of what the LOC or United Order is related to, because they are different things.  They are not economic programs.  They are satanic inspired political systems of control and compulsion.  You are free of course to believe what you want, but you are wrong if you think they are just failed economic programs and the LOC/United Order are in any way related.

Freedom is an integral part of the Gospel.  Socialism and communism deny freedom.   Reminds me of satan's plan that we all rejected.  Compulsion in any form is not a part of the Gospel.

 

 

Edited November 29, 2018 by mirkwood

[mirkwood]

Oh and @MormonGator wasn't talking to me when he mentioned personal beliefs.

[Guest MormonGator]

2 minutes ago, mirkwood said:

Oh and @MormonGator wasn't talking to me when he mentioned personal beliefs.

Compared to you, I AM a communist. 

Then again, compared to you, those in the John Birch Society are socialists. 

[Lost Boy]

18 minutes ago, clbent04 said:

2017 Net Profit

United States Postal Service      

-$2,700,000,000 (NEGATIVE amount)

UPS                                                

$3,400,000,000 (POSITIVE amount)

FedEx                                                   

$3,000,000,000 (POSITIVE amount)

First, the US postal service was not a take over.  It has basically been with us since day one.

Second, UPS and FedEx do not provide the same service as the post office.  There is some overlap, but they stick to packages and priority mail and don't offer bulk/first class type mail.

So I would not consider these fair comparison. 

[mirkwood]

5 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Compared to you, I AM a communist. 

Then again, compared to you, those in the John Birch Society are socialists. 

Quote. Of. The. Thread.

[Tyme]

4 minutes ago, mirkwood said:

Quote. Of. The. Thread.

I just hope you turn in your bump stock when they get banned.

[The Folk Prophet]

52 minutes ago, clbent04 said:

Don't talk about religion or politics they say...  Talk about them at the same time!

 

Politics are religion.

[mirkwood]

8 minutes ago, Tyme said:

I just hope you turn in your bump stock when they get banned.

I don't own a bump stock.  They are stupid accessories.

[clbent04]

30 minutes ago, Lost Boy said:

First, the US postal service was not a take over.  It has basically been with us since day one.

You asked for examples of what the government has taken over and run poorly. The government took over our general mailing system from the get go as outlined in the US Constitution. What’s the difference if they took it over at a later point in time versus from the get go? It’s operated poorly either way.

30 minutes ago, Lost Boy said:

Second, UPS and FedEx do not provide the same service as the post office.  There is some overlap, but they stick to packages and priority mail and don't offer bulk/first class type mail.

So I would not consider these fair comparison. 

How do you not see this as a relevant comparison? You don’t need a set of identical twins to make a comparison. Even if UPS and FedEx starting offering the exact same services as USPS, do you think UPS’s and FedEx’s income statements would suddenly flop? When it comes to making money, our business sector has always outperformed the government across the board.

[Just_A_Guy]

59 minutes ago, Lost Boy said:

First, the US postal service was not a take over.  It has basically been with us since day one.

Second, UPS and FedEx do not provide the same service as the post office.  There is some overlap, but they stick to packages and priority mail and don't offer bulk/first class type mail.

So I would not consider these fair comparison. 

I would also add that USPS is legally mandated to serve markets that private carriers can opt out of; and is hamstrung by unions in a way that would have killed a for-profit entity long ago.  

As far as communism/socialism versus the Law of Consecration goes, though:  the difference is the power dynamic.  That’s the same reason, as I understand it, that in progressive circles a college giving preference to a Caucasian applicant based solely on race is considered “racist”, while doing the same thing for a member of a “traditionally disadvantaged” race is considered kosher.  (I think that distinction  creates more problems than it solves as it applies to race; but I can at least sympathize with the rationale.)

Similarly, in the present discussion—the power dynamic is everything.  We don’t know about the City of Enoch, of course; but under the United Order a member sat down with their bishop and reported how they had done for the year.  The member might say “I think my surplus is x”.  The bishop might say “hmm, I think your surplus was really y”—but at the end of the day, it was the member who defined the surplus and chose whether or not to turn it over to the bishop; and if the bishop didn’t like it, that was the end of the matter.  (The faith community, of course, might exert “soft pressure” socially; but the member maintained equal standing under the law with his rights to life, liberty and property remaining uninfriged.)  

In the United Order, you were free to walk away from the game.  In state-sanctioned communism/socialism, you aren’t—you play ball or, ultimately, they kill you.  That change in power dynamic is what makes the difference between an idea that might not be half-bad, versus de facto enslavement.  And it’s why most Mormons are as offended at being labeled “communists”, as progressives would be at being labeled “segregationists” or “racists”.  (More so, really—mathematically, self-proclaimed socialists and communists probably killed, enslaved, raped, stole from, and/or generally brutalized more people in fifty years than racists did in the preceding three centuries.)

Edited November 29, 2018 by Just_A_Guy

[Guest MormonGator]

23 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

In the United Order, you were free to walk away from the game.  In state-sanctioned communism/socialism, you aren’t—you play ball or, ultimately, they kill you. 

Boom. Give this man a cigar. Exactly right. 

Oh sorry, you prefer champagne. My bad. 

[anatess2]

2 hours ago, Lost Boy said:

https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20110920.013390/full/

Honestly, how many things has government taken over?  Very few things and mostly what they did take over were things that essentially needed bailing out like rail roads, particularly amtrak.  Am I wrong here?  Please provide examples of things the government took over and ran more poorly.

Yes, you are wrong here.

The government spent $2.1 BILLION just to build ONE WEBSITE for Obamacare.  ONE WEBSITE.  Do you know how many websites I've built that are more data and functionally complex than Obamacare?  Hundreds.  Do you know how many of those had a Project Cost that exceed $1 Million?  ZILCH.  NADA.  Yet you have a government that can spend way more than 200 times the amount on a website that... FAILED ON OPENING DAY.

 

[Lost Boy]

26 minutes ago, clbent04 said:

You asked for examples of what the government has taken over and run poorly. The government took over our general mailing system from the get go as outlined in the US Constitution. What’s the difference if they took it over at a later point in time versus from the get go? It’s operated poorly either way.

How do you not see this as a relevant comparison? You don’t need a set of identical twins to make a comparison. Even if UPS and FedEx starting offering the exact same services as USPS, do you think UPS’s and FedEx’s income statements would suddenly flop? When it comes to making money, our business sector has always outperformed the government across the board.

They didn't take anything over.  There was no private mail service to take over.  It was just created.

You are right, you don't need a set of identical twins, but you at least should be somewhat similar. The USPS is mandated to do much more.  Did you know that the USPS does not receive tax money?   If the USPS only offered the same services as UPS and FedEx, chances are they would be similarly as profitable.  Also, the USPS is not a for profit institute.  If you want to pay more for mail, I am sure we the people could set them up as a for profit entity.  

When it comes to making money our business sector has not outperformed government across the board as the two don't compete.  The only place they have really competed is in the healthcare insurance market...  medicare...  in in that they have performed quite well.

 

[Lost Boy]

1 minute ago, anatess2 said:

Yes, you are wrong here.

The government spent $2.1 BILLION just to build ONE WEBSITE for Obamacare.  ONE WEBSITE.  Do you know how many websites I've built that are more data and functionally complex than Obamacare?  Hundreds.  Do you know how many of those had a Project Cost that exceed $1 Million?  ZILCH.  NADA.  Yet you have a government that can spend way more than 200 times the amount on a website that... FAILED ON OPENING DAY.

 

Really?  you want me to believe your statement above?  Not happening.  While I'll agree that the website had issues and probably cost more than it should, I don't believe for a minute that you could have done the obamacare website all by your little lonesome.  And just because something is not as "data complex" doesn't mean that it was expensive to create.

And nor do I believe for a second that the government spent $2.1 billion on coding the website.  Perhaps you could dig a little and see where that $2.1 billion went.  I personally think Obama care is awful.  But at least I have some understanding of why the website cost $2.1 billion....  It wasn't for the computer programmers.  There was a lot more that went into it than that and there isn't a chance on this planet that you could have done the obama care website by yourself even if you had a lifetime to do it.

[Guest Godless]

4 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Yes, you are wrong here.

The government spent $2.1 BILLION just to build ONE WEBSITE for Obamacare.  ONE WEBSITE.  Do you know how many websites I've built that are more data and functionally complex than Obamacare?  Hundreds.  Do you know how many of those had a Project Cost that exceed $1 Million?  ZILCH.  NADA.  Yet you have a government that can spend way more than 200 times the amount on a website that... FAILED ON OPENING DAY.

 

How much traffic did your websites have on opening day? How many government agencies did your websites communicate with? How secure were your websites and their interactions with external websites? 

I'm not saying $2.1B isn't a lot of money. It definitely is (and as far as I can tell, it's an accurate figure, to be fair). But the server space and level of encryption needed to maintain healthcare.gov ain't cheap. Neither is the payroll for the army of programmers you need to build and maintain such a thing.

[clbent04]

22 minutes ago, Lost Boy said:

Did you know that the USPS does not receive tax money?  

Wrong. It does in one form or another. Various tax breaks, cheap borrowing, and $18 billion in subsidies provided at the taxpayer's expense.

http://fortune.com/2015/03/27/us-postal-service/

22 minutes ago, Lost Boy said:

When it comes to making money our business sector has not outperformed government across the board as the two don't compete.  The only place they have really competed is in the healthcare insurance market...  medicare...  in in that they have performed quite well.

Edited November 29, 2018 by clbent04

[Lost Boy]

For all you decrying socialism....

Universal health care is no more socialism than the military is.  No more than public education is.  No more than your public roads are.

Socialism  --  a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

Universal healthcare is not a production of healthcare.  it would be a distribution of funds, but not services nor of an exchange of goods.  That would all be still in the private sector.  It isn't socialized medicine, it is socialized insurance...  which we already have anyway..  medicare... and by most measures it is run well as it only does one thing... distribute money.  Entities such as the VA are aimed at far more... providing products, distribution, etc.  The VA is true social medicine.  Should we get rid of the VA?  

And for those who are opposed to universal health care.  What do you do for those out of no fault of their own not be able to pay for health care?  Do you just let them die?  What is your plan?

[clbent04]

5 minutes ago, Lost Boy said:

And for those who are opposed to universal health care.  What do you do for those out of no fault of their own not be able to pay for health care?  Do you just let them die?  What is your plan?

I think you're right to say we need to do something better for those who can't afford to pay for health care. But Obamacare is not the answer. From it's inception, my own monthly medical premium went up from $200 to $500.  And I know many low-income and middle-class families who got hit even harder than that.