You want far left extreamism?

At a Democratic rally Friday in Massachusetts, Hillary Clinton’s attempt to attack “trickle-down economics,” resulted in a spectacularly odd statement, according to The Washington Free Beacon.

Clinton defended raising the minimum wage saying “Don’t let anybody tell you that raising the minimum wage will kill jobs, they always say that.”

She went on to state that businesses and corporations are not the job creators of America. “Don’t let anybody tell you that it’s corporations and businesses that create jobs,” the former Secretary of State said.

Clinton’s comment will likely be used frequently to attack her as another big-government Democrat. She is seen by many as already running for president in 2016.

Just amazing why would anyone vote for that woman. Get it that woman.

If corporations and businesses don't create jobs.... who does? The only one left would be the government that would have to nationalize industry, communism, in order to create jobs.

Just a rehash of the LSoS's infamous "You didn't build that" comment.
No body ever accused the Democrats of being all that bright.

If it was not for the government building those roads, Water plants, waste plants those business wouldn't have a pot to piss in.

I will guarantee you that if the Government did not tax We The People, it couldn't afford those roads and water plants. Not only that, but if local governments were not petitioned by their local constituents to improve their lives the local governments would not the take said tax moneys to businesses to build roads and water plants.

ford plasko wrote:

I will guarantee you that if the Government did not tax We The People, it couldn't afford those roads and water plants. Not only that, but if local governments were not petitioned by their local constituents to improve their lives the local governments would not the take said tax moneys to businesses to build roads and water plants.    

I'd be careful throwing those guarantees around. There have been plenty of cases where various government entities built roads and bridges to nowhere that nobody wanted for any reason whatsoever. Aside from the politicians and sometimes construction unions, that is.

What PappyLee does not realize is that roads are built for the military complex. They are not for business but to move military equipment around. That is why Eisenhower built the Interstate System. Not for business. Throughout time roads bridges have been built to march armies not for civilians. Yes Business does use them. However business also paid for them. Oh and Pappy one other thing. Private business builds roads not the federal government. Sure they give the money to the construction companies that bid on them but that money is tax money coming from someone that earned it.

Pissedoffvulcan wrote:

What PappyLee does not realize is that roads are built for the military complex. They are not for business but to move military equipment around. That is why Eisenhower built the Interstate System. Not for business. Throughout time roads bridges have been built to march armies not for civilians. Yes Business does use them. However business also paid for them. Oh and Pappy one other thing. Private business builds roads not the federal government. Sure they give the money to the construction companies that bid on them but that money is tax money coming from someone that earned it.

Wrong. The military was never even a consideration until 1922, and even then, it was secondary.


But back on topic, Democrats are just spewing the same BS Republicans do. It's all aimed at the low information voter, which makes up well over 50% of the voting public.

Bandit wrote:

Pissedoffvulcan wrote:

What PappyLee does not realize is that roads are built for the military complex. They are not for business but to move military equipment around. That is why Eisenhower built the Interstate System. Not for business. Throughout time roads bridges have been built to march armies not for civilians. Yes Business does use them. However business also paid for them. Oh and Pappy one other thing. Private business builds roads not the federal government. Sure they give the money to the construction companies that bid on them but that money is tax money coming from someone that earned it.

Wrong. The military was never even a consideration until 1922, and even then, it was secondary.


But back on topic, Democrats are just spewing the same BS Republicans do. It's all aimed at the low information voter, which makes up well over 50% of the voting public.

I disagree and agree. Interstate system was modeled off of Hitler's Autobahn to move military equipment. What is one of the first things the military does? Destroys roads and bridges. Without roads the military does not move period. This has been since the dawn of time. Even during our own civil war the North put railroads under military command so they could move equipment.

Even in early history Armies do not march through the terrain but on roads. The military importance of roads is not a secondary thought.

Now for democrats being insane you are right.

I'd point out that it isn't always the government that builds roads, Water plants, and waste plants either. In my home town the water plant to make the river water drinkable and the waste water treatment plants for sewage were both built by the oil refinery that used to be here. The refinery was put out of business about fifteen years ago, by the state and federal governments no less, and now all the infrastructure and equipment for those water plants needs maintenance and upgrades and the governments don't want to pay for it.

And I also know that a lot of roads across the country were built by businesses, the lumber trade and railroads being two of the biggest for doing that.

Annoyed wrote:

ford plasko wrote:

I will guarantee you that if the Government did not tax We The People, it couldn't afford those roads and water plants. Not only that, but if local governments were not petitioned by their local constituents to improve their lives the local governments would not the take said tax moneys to businesses to build roads and water plants.    

I'd be careful throwing those guarantees around. There have been plenty of cases where various government entities built roads and bridges to nowhere that nobody wanted for any reason whatsoever. Aside from the politicians and sometimes construction unions, that is.

Yeah I'm aware of that. We have sidewalks to nowhere in my town. The county is asking us to vote for a 1% sales tax increase for more parking lots and......SIDEWALKS.

Pissedoffvulcan wrote:

I disagree and agree. Interstate system was modeled off of Hitler's Autobahn to move military equipment. What is one of the first things the military does? Destroys roads and bridges. Without roads the military does not move period. This has been since the dawn of time. Even during our own civil war the North put railroads under military command so they could move equipment.

Even in early history Armies do not march through the terrain but on roads. The military importance of roads is not a secondary thought.

Now you're wrong about everything. The Autobahn was never Hitlers, and had nothing to do with the military. It was for economics. The first section was completed before Hitler even became chancellor.

Our highway/road system was built by and for commerce, period.

Bandit wrote:

Pissedoffvulcan wrote:

I disagree and agree. Interstate system was modeled off of Hitler's Autobahn to move military equipment. What is one of the first things the military does? Destroys roads and bridges. Without roads the military does not move period. This has been since the dawn of time. Even during our own civil war the North put railroads under military command so they could move equipment.

Even in early history Armies do not march through the terrain but on roads. The military importance of roads is not a secondary thought.

Now you're wrong about everything. The Autobahn was never Hitlers, and had nothing to do with the military. It was for economics. The first section was completed before Hitler even became chancellor.

Our highway/road system was built by and for commerce, period.

LMAO I guess that is what you get for listening too other people. However I am not wrong about the interstate system it was because of the military convoy.

The Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways (commonly known as the Interstate Highway System, Interstate Freeway System, Interstate System, or simply the Interstate) is a network of freeways that forms a part of the National Highway System of the United States. The system is named for President Dwight D. Eisenhower, who championed its formation.

The Interstate Highway System gained a champion in President Dwight D. Eisenhower, who was influenced by his experiences as a young Army officer crossing the country in the 1919 Army Convoy on the Lincoln Highway, the first road across America. Eisenhower gained an appreciation of the Reichsautobahn system, the first "national" implementation of modern Germany's Autobahn network, as a necessary component of a national defense system while he was serving as Supreme Commander of the Allied forces in Europe during World War II.[9] He recognized that the proposed system would also provide key ground transport routes for military supplies and troop deployments in case of an emergency or foreign invasion.

As one of the components of the National Highway System, Interstate Highways improve the mobility of military troops to and from airports, seaports, rail terminals, and other military bases. Interstate Highways also connect to other roads that are a part of the Strategic Highway Network, a system of roads identified as critical to the U.S. Department of Defense.[28]

Pissedoffvulcan wrote:

LMAO I guess that is what you get for listening too other people. However I am not wrong about the interstate system it was because of the military convoy.

Yes, you are still wrong. I'm not sure who you're listening to, but stop already.

" the proposed system would also provide key ground transport routes for military supplies and troop deployments in case of an emergency or foreign invasion."

"Would also provide" means as a secondary consideration. The reason we rarely use it, is because we would destroy it. Our primary means of transportation is by rail. Always has been. Our highway/road systems were never designed for military traffic. No nation has one, not even Germany.

eber322 wrote:

And I also know that a lot of roads across the country were built by businesses

News flash for you. ALL of them were. As I looked at your comments in this thread, you really have no idea just how right you are.

Government built those roads. If not for the federal government those roads would have never been built. They built them for business's and those business's owe the American people. Time for them to pony up.

PappyLee wrote:

Government built those roads. If not for the federal government those roads would have never been built. They built them for business's and those business's owe the American people. Time for them to pony up.

I realize that logical thought is a stretch for you, but I'm in a generous mood this morning so I'll try to explain it anyway.

Businesses and the private citizens who use those roads have ponied up.
They pay gasoline taxes, excise taxes on various automotive/truck components, vehicle registration and other government fees. Many govt. entities don't even use the money already collected for highway construction & maintenance, they divert it to their general funds instead of using these tax proceeds for the purpose for which they were collected. And then they want higher vehicle taxes, claiming they don't have the money to fix roads & bridges!

PappyLee wrote:

Government built those roads. If not for the federal government those roads would have never been built. They built them for business's and those business's owe the American people. Time for them to pony up.

Enough has been posted in this thread to prove you wrong.

Bandit wrote:

PappyLee wrote:

Government built those roads. If not for the federal government those roads would have never been built. They built them for business's and those business's owe the American people. Time for them to pony up.

Enough has been posted in this thread to prove you wrong.

I have proved my point very well. You guys have yet to prove anything. l

PappyLee wrote:

Bandit wrote:

PappyLee wrote:

Government built those roads. If not for the federal government those roads would have never been built. They built them for business's and those business's owe the American people. Time for them to pony up.

Enough has been posted in this thread to prove you wrong.

I have proved my point very well. You guys have yet to prove anything. l

To be continued next week, same bat time, same bat channel?

PappyLee wrote:

I have proved my point very well. You guys have yet to prove anything. l

At least POV admitted ignorance. He just didn't know. There is no shame in that. However he looked it up himself, and conceded I was correct. Not because I said so, but because he checked for himself.

We have nothing to prove, because it's historical fact. Long before there were governments or militaries, man has been making roads. We have evidence dating back to 5000 B.C. By 4000 B.C. we have evidence of paved roads. Why? Commerce and ease of travel. It's all about economics.

You however, have proven nothing. Aside from the fact you have no clue what you are talking about. So with that in mind, I'm done with this thread.

Bandit wrote:

PappyLee wrote:

I have proved my point very well. You guys have yet to prove anything. l

At least POV admitted ignorance. He just didn't know. There is no shame in that. However he looked it up himself, and conceded I was correct. Not because I said so, but because he checked for himself.

We have nothing to prove, because it's historical fact. Long before there were governments or militaries, man has been making roads. We have evidence dating back to 5000 B.C. By 4000 B.C. we have evidence of paved roads. Why? Commerce and ease of travel. It's all about economics.

You however, have proven nothing. Aside from the fact you have no clue what you are talking about. So with that in mind, I'm done with this thread.

This is what I wrote "Government built those roads. If not for the federal government those roads would have never been built. They built them for business's and those business's owe the American people. Time for them to pony up." At no time did I say they were built for military purposes. But for commerce and business. If not for government those business would not exist. They owe the American people.

PappyLee wrote:

This is what I wrote "Government built those roads. If not for the federal government those roads would have never been built. They built them for business's and those business's owe the American people. Time for them to pony up." At no time did I say they were built for military purposes. But for commerce and business. If not for government those business would not exist. They owe the American people.

And, as I have already pointed out, those businesses have ALREADY paid up via the fuel and vehicle taxes and fees that they have already paid, and are continuing to pay via those taxes and fees.

Please stop ignoring facts.