They used to make fun of us…

[devdrone6]

90% of the return on productivity over the last 45+ years has gone to the people willing to work hard or innovate.

I fixed it for you.

Don't give me this bs about being oppressed by the wealthy. I am not wealthy, but I'm in America which by default makes me wealthy as compared to the 90% of the world.

Almost every "very wealthy" person (at least those that run the world right now - Amazon, Google, MS, Tesla, Apple, Facebook...) you put in that category has come up from almost nothing. They didn't inherit it. These are companies that didn't exist 45 years ago.

That is literally the American dream - become wealthy. It is not to loathe the wealthy! It is why 99% of the world's population wants to come here (legally and illegally) and willing to do die to do it.

Sponsored

 

[MilliVanilli]

“Raccoons literally confuse these with dumpsters and try to break in!!!”… one instance where a guy kept food in the bed

Actually, there might be some truth in this one.

Sentry Mode caught this happy raccoon-lookalike thing writing profanities on the truck. She and her friend hit several Teslas in the parking lot that day. They're so cool and brave! They look like they live great lives.

 

[HaulingAss]

Sentry Mode caught this happy raccoon-lookalike thing writing profanities on the truck. She and her friend hit several Teslas in the parking lot that day. They're so cool and brave! They look like they live great lives.

It looks like she's thinking about as deep as she ever does.

"I wish I could have that sleek electric car but, since I can't, I think I'll just transfer my angst to scribbled profanities on the object of my desire."

 

[GuyV]

I fixed it for you.

Don't give me this bs about being oppressed by the wealthy. I am not wealthy, but I'm in America which by default makes me wealthy as compared to the 90% of the world.

Almost every "very wealthy" person (at least those that run the world right now - Amazon, Google, MS, Tesla, Apple, Facebook...) you put in that category has come up from almost nothing. They didn't inherit it. These are companies that didn't exist 45 years ago.

That is literally the American dream - become wealthy. It is not to loathe the wealthy! It is why 99% of the world's population wants to come here (legally and illegally) and willing to do die to do it.

No, you haven't "fixed it", you've corrupted the dream of our founders, to replace the privileged aristocracy with equality for all, to promote the general welfare not that of an elite few.

 

[HaulingAss]

No, you haven't "fixed it", you've corrupted the dream of our founders, to replace the privileged aristocracy with equality for all, to promote the general welfare not that of an elite few.

You might need a little early American history lesson:

Most historians agree, there were 7 core "founding fathers" of America:


George Washington
John Adams
Thomas Jefferson
Benjamin Franklin
Alexander Hamilton
James Madison
John Jay

Four of the seven came from aristocratic backgrounds, three came from humble backgrounds. Benjamin Franklin started out poor but died wealthy due to his industriousness and keen business sense. The self-made printer and entrepreneur left a substantial estate, including funds he bequeathed to Boston and Philadelphia. He had retired rich decades earlier. There were no government funded social programs, no social safety net, no food stamps or housing authority. The founders believed in a system based on meritocracy, that industrious individuals could make their own way, free of burdensome government interference.

The founder's dream was to have a government that could provide for general order and lawfulness and that would foster an environment where industriousness could thrive. A system where the government didn't take what was rightfully yours, where government would allow production and commerce to thrive. They believed the way of success was through dedication and hard work.

That is a far cry from the socialism you speak of. You don't promote the general welfare of all by taking from the most industrious and productive members and giving it to the laziest and least productive. The founders believed social programs were the job of the community, outside of official government functions. Our founding fathers would be appalled by talk of taking money of the wealthy and distributing it to the less productive, simply because they had a lot of it. That's not freedom, it's tyranny. So don't try to pretend that "equality for all" was referring to financial means. It was about equality under the law, not economic equality.

Get your facts straight and don't subvert the principles the founding fathers of America enshrined into law. There is no reasonable debate on this issue.

 

[Eka]

You might need a little early American history lesson:

Most historians agree, there were 7 core "founding fathers" of America:


George Washington
John Adams
Thomas Jefferson
Benjamin Franklin
Alexander Hamilton
James Madison
John Jay

Four of the seven came from aristocratic backgrounds, three came from humble backgrounds. Benjamin Franklin started out poor but died wealthy due to his industriousness and keen business sense. The self-made printer and entrepreneur left a substantial estate, including funds he bequeathed to Boston and Philadelphia. He had retired rich decades earlier. There were no government funded social programs, no social safety net, no food stamps or housing authority. The founders believed in a system based on meritocracy, that industrious individuals could make their own way, free of burdensome government interference.

The founder's dream was to have a government that could provide for general order and lawfulness and that would foster an environment where industriousness could thrive. A system where the government didn't take what was rightfully yours, where government would allow production and commerce to thrive. They believed the way of success was through dedication and hard work.

That is a far cry from the socialism you speak of. You don't promote the general welfare of all by taking from the most industrious and productive members and giving it to the laziest and least productive. The founders believed social programs were the job of the community, outside of official government functions. Our founding fathers would be appalled by talk of taking money of the wealthy and distributing it to the less productive, simply because they had a lot of it. That's not freedom, it's tyranny. So don't try to pretend that "equality for all" was referring to financial means. It was about equality under the law, not economic equality.

Get your facts straight and don't subvert the principles the founding fathers of America enshrined into law. There is no reasonable debate on this issue.

You might want to consult with actual historians rather than people with an agenda. US founding fathers writings is an area I haven't studied deeply myself, but I know I've seen many differing opinions over the decades. One of the interesting things is idea the founding fathers didn't like the government helping people has only been heavily promoted in the last 45 years. Oh, the people in Congress and The President who voted for all the social programs by and large were land owners. Land owners have been said to be the only ones the founding fathers considered to count. Think about that, land owners wanted the downtrodden landless people to be helped. Our government is by and for the people., ie you and me. Some would love for you to get discouraged and not think you don't have a say, or even a right to say. Don't listen to their BS.

A general rule for laws. Don't make any law that you wouldn't want your worst enemy to use. Yes, think very carefully on that one. Read the text of the laws. Do not listen to what they say they do. They giver the laws feel good names, but put poison for the nation in them.

I suggest going and reading up on the Powell Memo. Bill Moyers has a reasonable article on it. People are finally fighting back. Some people with money have an agenda to take over the US government have been slowly getting the laws and treaties changed to their advantage. Yes, be very worried about treaty law. It is right up there in precedence with the Constitution. Get it written into treaty law, and you could loose rights. Treaty law makes it illegal to call for the boycott of a country.

Back in pre 1970 America, tens of thousands of voices were heard in the news. This requirement for only local ownership, and control was due to excesses by a few wealthy who were steering public opinion with yellow journalism spread by their journalism empires. Laws and regulations have been changed and now media consolidation has again become the norm. So now you only see the voices of a few in TV and newspaper news. When people started routing around them with the early Internet, those oligarchs who want to take control of the US government have reacted and are taking over social media. The TiKTok ownership change is a prime example. ICE protest information posts are now getting silenced on TikTok. Even ones made by elected politicians. The oligarcs have been trying to make it burdensome or even legally perilous to run social media sites. They want to get rid of anonymity. Without it we are in peril. Interesting bit, we likely wouldn't have had an United States of America if it wasn't for pen name and out right anonymous writings circulated about pre revolution.

 

[GuyV]

You might need a little early American history lesson:

Most historians agree, there were 7 core "founding fathers" of America:


George Washington
John Adams
Thomas Jefferson
Benjamin Franklin
Alexander Hamilton
James Madison
John Jay

Four of the seven came from aristocratic backgrounds, three came from humble backgrounds. Benjamin Franklin started out poor but died wealthy due to his industriousness and keen business sense. The self-made printer and entrepreneur left a substantial estate, including funds he bequeathed to Boston and Philadelphia. He had retired rich decades earlier. There were no government funded social programs, no social safety net, no food stamps or housing authority. The founders believed in a system based on meritocracy, that industrious individuals could make their own way, free of burdensome government interference.

The founder's dream was to have a government that could provide for general order and lawfulness and that would foster an environment where industriousness could thrive. A system where the government didn't take what was rightfully yours, where government would allow production and commerce to thrive. They believed the way of success was through dedication and hard work.

That is a far cry from the socialism you speak of. You don't promote the general welfare of all by taking from the most industrious and productive members and giving it to the laziest and least productive. The founders believed social programs were the job of the community, outside of official government functions. Our founding fathers would be appalled by talk of taking money of the wealthy and distributing it to the less productive, simply because they had a lot of it. That's not freedom, it's tyranny. So don't try to pretend that "equality for all" was referring to financial means. It was about equality under the law, not economic equality.

Get your facts straight and don't subvert the principles the founding fathers of America enshrined into law. There is no reasonable debate on this issue.

Maybe you should google some facts before you challenge others. The development of the US democratic system of government was the most profound product of the Enlightenment. Our framers and their ideological sources such as Locke, Montesquieu and Rousseau would be appalled by how their philosophies have been twisted to empower our modern oligarchs. There are still quite of few of us who remember our history and insist on No Kings in America.

 

[roadrunner32]

After returning from a long vacation. OK call it a trip (I'm retired) I'm feeling better about the long post I made about anti Tesla influencers. "The future future does look bright" here in Amerca. I saw a new cybertruck in the neighborhood and only saw two BYDs down in Brazil. Here's a new twist on the same old advertising argument. We Tesla owners are in a limited group of thinkers, we can easily break out of the old way of doing things. We can easily evaluate the advantages new technology. And I'm particularity impressed at the electrical knowledge of people on this forum. The keyword in the description of our group is "limited" which means that those of us that bought or even considered Teslas have already bought them. Tesla has saturated this market. How do we grow the market. Advertising! The price of Teslas has been on par with gas cars and trucks for a while now. All the conversations about the blockage of a certain straight at Iran makes the time right for Tesla advertising. I'm not an environmentalist but it does make sense to me, now that we are talking about oil again. This war was never about oil but Oh it sure has turned into it. We need a clever way of somehow expresng that the phrase "the green new scam" is a scam itself. And we need to get people thinking about why are we just burning up this precious commodity that we have been paying so dearly for.

 

[SlegMD]

Lobbyists and propagandists surely have no impact on the subject matter

Sponsored