Is there a Civil War coming to America?

By: Northern Maine On: Wed Nov 21, 2012 7:37 am

"A civil war is a war between organized groups within the same nation. The aim of one side may be to take control of the country or a region, to achieve independence for a region, or to change government policies." I think we are already in a civil war of sorts here in the U.S., but not of the traditional fashion that many of us have been educated.

good point, even tho its an election year i have never heard so much bickering at the lunch table on job sites. even the skilled trades are split 50/50

Unfortunately....I see the same as you, but not just now, but over the past 10 years....we all have common concerns...but I think it's the "how to fix it" that has everyone up in arms...many "philosophies" on doing so, is what is dividing this country. I see a conundrum in the fact that we as a country can not come to broader ideology that can get us where we need to be instead of getting caught up on many of the miniscule points that set us apart.

It was no different when the country was formed. The way we went and the freedom and success we enjoyed were not accidental, but will we go back or go FORWARD. We are back to freedom and capitalism or forward to Socialism. Make a choice and tune out the chatter to confuse you.

Kevin

Everyone has a different definition of forward.

As I asked before, if you walk to the edge of a cliff do you take a step forward, or turn around and take a step forward? Which way is progress?

IMO, we need to go back. Back to hard work, living off the land, and taking care of our neighbors. Hand outs enable the monster that is growing like a weed right now. Stepping off the cliff is not an option, forward or not.

Rwalker wrote:Everyone has a different definition of forward.

As I asked before, if you walk to the edge of a cliff do you take a step forward, or turn around and take a step forward? Which way is progress?

IMO, we need to go back. Back to hard work, living off the land, and taking care of our neighbors. Hand outs enable the monster that is growing like a weed right now. Stepping off the cliff is not an option, forward or not.

Rwalker wrote:Everyone has a different definition of forward.

As I asked before, if you walk to the edge of a cliff do you take a step forward, or turn around and take a step forward? Which way is progress?

IMO, we need to go back. Back to hard work, living off the land, and taking care of our neighbors. Hand outs enable the monster that is growing like a weed right now. Stepping off the cliff is not an option, forward or not.

Historically, do you know why SS and other entitlements started aside from the desire to give people a chance? The government and people in charge looked at what was going on around the world in other countries during that period (end of WWI and then the Depression) and realized that revolutions were very bad things. A social safety net is a method used to tamp down on that type of unrest and it has succeeded quite well in doing so. Starving, desperate people with no hope at a better life tend to not go quietly away. There were a bunch of huge warning signs of that type of unrest in the first few years of the Depression (The Bonus Army protest comes to mind)

Thus, we have a safety net in place now.

No, we used to have a safety net. Those are now considered "career goals".

Big difference between helping those who are down and need it, those whose jobs have been taken, those who have worked hard and are in a bind. Th difference is there are those who are brought up to make that their life goal: spit out kids, live well off the tax payers.

That isn't a "safety net" at all.

Back before SS wages were low & people barely got by there was very little for the average man to save. As always raising a family took most of the paychecks & the mother was just that a stat at home mother, very few women worked most men worked until they no longer could or died, there were no 401s or for that matter pensions. The problem then as now if people have to work into their later years there are fewer jobs opening up so SS gave people at least enough to be less of a burden on family since most families were larger & many lived together or close by. I look for sooner rather than later if you have been lucky enough to be able to provide a good retirement income for yourself you will probably have your SS reduced according to income.

Rwalker wrote:No, we used to have a safety net. Those are now considered "career goals".

Big difference between helping those who are down and need it, those whose jobs have been taken, those who have worked hard and are in a bind. Th difference is there are those who are brought up to make that their life goal: spit out kids, live well off the tax payers.

That isn't a "safety net" at all.

You might want to actually go look at some statistics on welfare instead of spouting off Foxnews talking points...

Speaking of spouting Why don't you post some links--AND what makes you think they are more reliable then your so called FOX talking points--give ya something to do

freetown fred wrote:Speaking of spouting Why don't you post some links--AND what makes you think they are more reliable then your so called FOX talking points--give ya something to do

Nah, I'm good.

Ok, then let me help:

http://reason.com/blog/2012/11/21/why-a ... ericans-on

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/food-sta ... isan-roots

There is a pox on both houses when it comes to this stuff. Democrats like to take credit for it and make it socially acceptable, while Republicans more often than not shamefully overlook their own part in expanding these programs. Interestingly, in the case of food stamps the program expansions come as part of "farm" bills, which is another pox on both houses: subsidy for agribusiness (both direct and through ethanol mandates and subsidy).

You might want to actually go look at some statistics on welfare instead of spouting off Foxnews talking points...

Not so much a fan of Fox news or CNN. As a matter of fact, if it wasnt for Discovery, Animal Planet, FX, Nat Geo, and my football stations, I woudln't have much use for the TV at all.

I get my facts from opening my eyes and seeing things every single day. Every day I have to go into town, every time I go to work. I get to hear it and see it first hand. I have heard people say they are trying to have another child to increase the help they get from the government. I have seen the flood of people at Wal-mart on food stamp day. I have seen the lady in line pay for her food with food stamps while talking on her Iphone. I have seen the lady with 10 kids from 8 different dudes living in a free row house getting free heat and free food. I have heard the incarcerated state they like coming back to jail in the winter because they have 3 hots and a bed, and best of all free heat.

The system is and has been broken. It needs to be fixed. Simple things could fix it: drug tests, job training, and sterilization. Career goals should not be to spit out babies and live off the system. We have allowed this to go on for far too long. You want some actual links??? OK: http://www.pawic.com/eligibility.html

Really? I am a family of 6 and I have no problem feeding my kids, clothing them, or putting a roof over their head. I also feed my hobbies. And my prep storage. And I do not make 6 figures. If you are a family of 6 and you can't survive on $57,000 a year, there is a SERIOUS issue in the way you live.

It needs to come back to hard work. Nothing like hearing people complain about the cost of fuel oil to heat their house, and when I suggest saving that money and installing a wood or coal burner, I get: But that would require me having to work to get my heat! People dont want to cut and split wood, or move coal. Seriously? Nah, instead they live high on the hog and get heat assistance. http://www.dpw.state.pa.us/foradults/he ... /index.htm

So they get help to heat their house and watch TV on a 60" flat screen or drive a new F-150...

Rwalker wrote:

You might want to actually go look at some statistics on welfare instead of spouting off Foxnews talking points...

Not so much a fan of Fox news or CNN. As a matter of fact, if it wasnt for Discovery, Animal Planet, FX, Nat Geo, and my football stations, I woudln't have much use for the TV at all.

I got rid of the satellite over a year ago. I get 12 channels free with a cheap antenna HD even, and that is plenty. I do miss some of the shows on the history channel but I can usually get everything I want to see on the internet. My wife said she thought it would bother her more but she has said she doesn't miss it at all. That money and a few other things I cut out, including smoking goes into a savings account. That was how I bought my AR and my wife is getting her new couch in the living room. It adds up.

I hear what your saying RW, back a few years ago it always amazed me when I drove by the projects & saw all the curtains blowing from open windowstats, at first I thought just maybe it was a central heating system set too high but found out later that each had their own furnace & AC & are just too lazy & ignorant to adjust the thermostat, most likely put the big screen TV in front of it.