Herman Cain

[tom@vp]

Do you understand most of congress, the house and presidents are attorneys

You said lawyers are behind all of politics. You said lawyers are setting things up to better themselves and other lawyers, even when the economy collapses. I disagree. I believe, to a large extent, what you are talking about are major financial institutions and businesses. Look at pharmaceutical companies, banks and brokers, agriculture lobbies, etc. They are the major forces. The lawyers act on behalf of business. If you follow the paper trail it doesn't end in lawyers pockets. Someone pays the lawyers.

Maybe you are trying to communicate how through it's esoteric nature law has grown to be more specialized than it needs: forcing large corporations seeking to affect change to the laws and government through indirect and anonymous means to continue hiring lawyers.

I hope I articulated my thoughts well and painted a picture in your mind that matches the one in mine.

 

[Duuuuuuuude]

My thought is that theres a reason behind that. The banks can then in turn lend the money back out to the "lower" (is there a more PC way to say that?) class in order to keep the giant sh!tball rolling.

That is what, in part, the bailouts were for. Some of it was to absorb the losses they were taking, some of it was to keep the money flowing with loans. The banks if you haven't noticed have really tightened up on the lending these past 3 years. That wasn't how it was supposed to work.

Instead of making loans, they took the money gave themselves bonuses.

Remember that for every $10 they hold, they can loan out $100. The more you give, the more they can loan. Or, the more they can sit on and play in the stock market with.

 

[opek]

Do you understand most of congress, the house and presidents are attorneys

Who controls those votes? They are supposed to vote with their belief of what is best for their constituents, but they will tell you they vote as their constituents do. They even campaign as such. I will argue they only wield a small amount of political power, and their votes are largely controlled by special interest groups - the most powerful of which serve to allow business to succeed in every way that is possible.

 

[hotrodsonoma]

well my 2 cents.but they all lie(for votes) to get in office and then change/go out of date like foreign currency.

 

[entropy]

Just to clarify the congress, or legislative body, is made up of the senate, and the house of representatives. The senators almost always have a law degree. A fair share of congressmen dont - thats why they are such idiots.
Lawyers may be a PIA, but a rep that dont know the law - thats scary and dangerous.

 

[entropy]

They are supposed to vote with their belief of what is best for their constituents, but they will tell you they vote as their constituents do. They even campaign as such. I will argue they only wield a small amount of political power, and their votes are largely controlled by special interest groups - the most powerful of which serve to allow business to succeed in every way that is possible.

They are not supposed to vote for what they think is best for us, they are to represent us, and present our vote (decisions on the matter) on the federal level. Of the people, for the people, by the people. I dont pay for them to think, thats when everything gets FUBAR!

 

[Crawl Wonder]

Just to clarify the congress, or legislative body, is made up of the senate, and the house of representatives. The senators almost always have a law degree. A fair share of congressmen dont - thats why they are such idiots.
Lawyers may be a PIA, but a rep that dont know the law - thats scary and dangerous.

Agreed!

 

[JeremyH]

Do you understand most of congress, the house and presidents are attorneys

I believe only about 60% of presidents are affiliated with the law profession. Some of those have been good presidents and some have been bad.

From the past ~30 years:
Carter = Military
Reagan = Actor
GHWB = Military
GWB = BA in history

The other two (Clinton and Obama) have backgrounds in law.

 

[RANOVRU]

Lawyers may be a PIA, but a rep that dont know the law - thats scary and dangerous.

Very true. However, the better the law is known the easier it is to take advantage of.

 

[rc dreemer]

Very true. However, the better the law is known the easier it is to take advantage of.

this is sooooooo true!!!!"thumbsup"

 

[rock hard]

Limiting taxation to spending is not going to see a decrease in spending. In fact, I'll bet you that spending would go up a bit.

Money has to be spent, it has to be circulated for our system to work. Putting it all in a safe or box or bank does nothing for the economy. Sure, economists are telling people to keep their money in the banks, but that only benefits the banks. ;-)



The only rich people who need put on a short leash are those who have done nothing more than lie, cheat, and steal to get their wealth.

again I disagree with your logic

Now these things may be true in your mind,and they way you live.

But if my tax is limited to what I spend alone,I will spend less.
I will trade and barter more,to limit the theft of my income through taxes.
Also yes some things must be bought,but by your own logic...that is really limited to food and clothes...I mean do you really NEED soap to wash your ars:mrgreen:


Now you may not see gains by banking,but I do benefit from storing my money in the bank.I actually earn money by doing so.
This is also about the safest place for my money,in my cd's there is no way a hacker can steal my money through the internet,I have to have the actual cd certificate to pull the money out when it matures.

 

[CREEPERBOB]

BY GOD THERE ARE SOME GOOD POINTS IN THIS THREAD, CARRY ON "thumbsup".
AND ITS GOOD TO SEE SO MANY INTERESTED IN OUR COUNTRY'S SITUATION, WE NEED TO CATCH IT BEFORE IT GOES OFF THE CLIFF CAUSE IT'S JUST UP AHEAD AND IT'LL BE LIKE THE GRAND CANYON, YOU FALL IN AND YOU'LL "NEVER" COME BACK.

 

[TexasSP]

Without having to repost multiple quotes here is my take on the lawyer issue:

I have friends and family who are lawyers and good people. Lawyers and the study of law is necessary to any government. My issue I take is how the system is so designed that no matter the outcome, lawyers always make their money. This is so evident in our law you would have to be buried in the sand to miss it.

I have no issue with lawyers being in congress, however, I have issue with all of congress being made of lawyers. You have to have a variety of minds and backgrounds working on major issues to come to a good conclusion. I also take major issue with the coded way laws are written. The laws should be written as to be easily understood by all individuals with at least 8th grade reading skills. They should not be so complicated as to be so easily misinterpreted and misunderstood by the majority of citizens.

As for congress voting for what they think is best, that is completely incorrect. As stated earlier congress is expected to vote as the majority of their constituents want.

 

[Duuuuuuuude]

again I disagree with your logic

:shock: No way.


:ror:

But if my tax is limited to what I spend alone,I will spend less.
I will trade and barter more,to limit the theft of my income through taxes.
Also yes some things must be bought,but by your own logic...that is really limited to food and clothes...I mean do you really NEED soap to wash your ars:mrgreen:

I believe there will be an initial mindset of "my paychecks are bigger, I can buy more stuff". Certainly I try not to think that way, but there are many that do. We are after all a nation of consumers, that is what we do.

Going beyond the basic necessities is up to the individual. Whether or not I need soap for my arse is something I invite you to investigate. ;-)

Now you may not see gains by banking,but I do benefit from storing my money in the bank.I actually earn money by doing so.
This is also about the safest place for my money,in my cd's there is no way a hacker can steal my money through the internet,I have to have the actual cd certificate to pull the money out when it matures.

Investments are somewhat safe, I'll grant you that. Still, when the banking and investment sector plays fast and loose with our money, the greater the risk of loss. Things could play out in such a way that your cd's are worth less than the certificate they're printed on.

WE NEED TO CATCH IT BEFORE IT GOES OFF THE CLIFF CAUSE IT'S JUST UP AHEAD AND IT'LL BE LIKE THE GRAND CANYON, YOU FALL IN AND YOU'LL "NEVER" COME BACK.

Until Wall Street and Washington can prove to me otherwise, I'd say we're already over the edge and falling fast. And on fire to boot.

So far all we've managed to do to rectify the situation is reward the ones who steered us to where we are now.

I have no issue with lawyers being in congress, however, I have issue with all of congress being made of lawyers. You have to have a variety of minds and backgrounds working on major issues to come to a good conclusion.

Agreed. "thumbsup"

As for congress voting for what they think is best, that is completely incorrect. As stated earlier congress is expected to vote as the majority of their constituents want.

Also agreed. I remember a story from earlier this year where people were flipping out over a representative who, against his own beliefs, voted in favor of what his constituents wanted.

 

[TexasSP]

Also agreed. I remember a story from earlier this year where people were flipping out over a representative who, against his own beliefs, voted in favor of what his constituents wanted.

Imagine that! :ror:

The parties don't like it when you don't toe the line.........

 

[opek]

As for congress voting for what they think is best, that is completely incorrect. As stated earlier congress is expected to vote as the majority of their constituents want.

If you read through the federalist papers (essays written back and fourth between the political parties, published in newspapers around the colonies) you will see how our elected official's job is to protect us from our own ignorance. When all of this was set up the general population was illiterate and uneducated. They could not read the essays. It was decided an educated and powerful man should take the place of the populations mind. The population could decide between various candidates who all had the capability of making informed political decisions on behalf, and in the best interests of, their constituents.

 

[sloppy]

Really You think the average moron with a bigger check would not spend more money?? Really?? If you really dont spend more good for you that would make you a minority. People allready spend all of their money plus they max out all the credit you can throw at them.. nothing would change.. They would still spend more then they make..

again I disagree with your logic

Now these things may be true in your mind,and they way you live.

But if my tax is limited to what I spend alone,I will spend less.
I will trade and barter more,to limit the theft of my income through taxes.
Also yes some things must be bought,but by your own logic...that is really limited to food and clothes...I mean do you really NEED soap to wash your ars:mrgreen:


Now you may not see gains by banking,but I do benefit from storing my money in the bank.I actually earn money by doing so.
This is also about the safest place for my money,in my cd's there is no way a hacker can steal my money through the internet,I have to have the actual cd certificate to pull the money out when it matures.

 

[TexasSP]

If you read through the federalist papers (essays written back and fourth between the political parties, published in newspapers around the colonies) you will see how our elected official's job is to protect us from our own ignorance. When all of this was set up the general population was illiterate and uneducated. They could not read the essays. It was decided an educated and powerful man should take the place of the populations mind. The population could decide between various candidates who all had the capability of making informed political decisions on behalf, and in the best interests of, their constituents.

However we don't govern based on the federalist papers, we govern based on the constitution. The federalist papers are important for having an idea of where ideas and thoughts came from but not so much for actually understanding how our country is supposed to run. If you based it on the federalist papers, all you would have is a bunch of conflicting information. Again, look to the constitution.

 

[opek]

However we don't govern based on the federalist papers, we govern based on the constitution. The federalist papers are important for having an idea of where ideas and thoughts came from but not so much for actually understanding how our country is supposed to run. If you based it on the federalist papers, all you would have is a bunch of conflicting information. Again, look to the constitution.

I just read the entire first article of the Constitution and no where does it say anything regarding legislatures being bound in any way to their constituents. Taken together with the limited support for direct democracy at the time of writing, I think it's very difficult to argue that the legislative branch is supposed to represent directly the opinions and wishes of the people.

Nothing has changed today, in terms of democratic powers. We only have say in local elections.

 

[rock hard]

Really You think the average moron with a bigger check would not spend more money?? Really?? If you really dont spend more good for you that would make you a minority. People allready spend all of their money plus they max out all the credit you can throw at them.. nothing would change.. They would still spend more then they make..

no i don't.!st off I don't think the average person who is actually earning a paycheck is a moron.And I think it will be a very short time till people learn how to keep more of their money by NOT purchasing as much.

But the people who have many mouths to feed and cloth will have a heavier tax than the do now,unless there are still deductions for dependents.