G.M. plant siezed by Venezuelan Gov't

[FordCosworth]

9 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

@FordCosworth--The lesson here is, context is your friend. Guess some people are easily triggered just by expressing a simple opinion. 

Looks like you missed the context of my post. Pretty easy to do when your head is burried in the sand - and being neck deep, I was quite surprised how easy you were triggered.

[surreal1272]

Talks about "narrow minds" but is convinced that muslims are the big problem in this world, so much so that he has to interject it into every non-car related discussion. 

 

 

Just wow.

13 minutes ago, FordCosworth said:

Looks like you missed the context of my post. Pretty easy to do when your head is burried in the sand - and being neck deep, I was quite surprised how easy you were triggered.

Again, whatever you have to tell yourself. You were the triggered one, with your immediate negative vote and talk of "narrow minds" which a bit of the pot calling the kettle black. There was no context to your post other than, "I don't care what was said about the U.S. And the first 150 years of capilist growth. I want to bring up how bad Muslim led nations were."  That was your context, which again is unrelated to the prior discussion which has been pointed out by Drew as well but yet you were only triggered by my response. Interesting yet typical. 

[loki]

1 hour ago, surreal1272 said:

@hyperv6--You spoke of the 150 years of pure capitalism building this country prior to the New Deal. Does that include the same capitalism responsible for the railroad industry that ran rough shod accross this country, displacing Native Americans while being built by Chinese and Mexican slave labor? How about our vast agriculture that was made successful by African American slave labor? Or how about the budding industrial revolution which led to such fine labor practices such as child labor and Irish slave labor? I can go on if you'd like but I am curious as to which part of early American capitalism should we owe our "success"? This country was built by economic tyrants.

 

We won't even get into you Puritan statements since Drew covered the bases there. f@#king puritans, a group so uptight that England said "get the f@#k out".

@Surreal1272, to break it down, don't we just have to show that either slave labor is actually part of capitalism, or is a practice not compatible?

 

33 minutes ago, FordCosworth said:

I downvote your whiny white guilt and condescending attitude. 

The whole damn world was built by " economic tyrants who exploited slaves ". FYI, the term  “slave” stems from “Slavic” i.e. can be a reference to the experience of millions of (white) Slavish people who endured centuries of slavery at the hands of African muslims. This, of course, is a most inconvenient truth, for it is a most Politically Incorrect truth. But truth is the truth. Easy enough to read about it too and includes most all countries and races, yet I don't see you crying for them.

 

just to make it simpler in the future, quote a place that has this info..... http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=slave

[FordCosworth]

2 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

Talks about "narrow minds" but is convinced that muslims are the big problem in this world, so much so that he has to interject it into every non-car related discussion. 

 

 

Just wow.

History - in this case where the term " slave " ( something you injected into this thread ) originated from is only relevant if it suits your agenda huh? 

Comical coming from the guy who harbours so much white guilt, and blames only whitey for all the turmoil of yesterday, I'll take your comment with a grain of salt.

   

[G. David Felt]

ON TOPIC!!!!

According to this NBC NEWS Story:

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/general-motors-says-venezuelan-officials-illegally-seize-plant-n748741

GM has called it quits, but is being far more honorable than other companies and especially the political environment.

GM is going to pay their employees Separation benefits as they are forced to stop all productions and sales in the country due to the illegal seizure by the government. GM hopes that once they run the courts in addressing this illegal act, the can come back to be the leader once again in the market with jobs and products.

This shows how great the GM CEO is in dealing with world wide issues. She could just walk away and pretty much no one would blame her, but she wants to continue to take care of the workers and hopes to be back in the market asap.

Mary you rock!  

[Drew Dowdell]

One wonders what the government of Venezuela plans to do with an auto manufacturing plant that has no parts suppliers.  At this point, it's just a large box on land.

[surreal1272]

22 minutes ago, loki said:

@Surreal1272, to break it down, don't we just have to show that either slave labor is actually part of capitalism, or is a practice not compatible?

 

just to make it simpler in the future, quote a place that has this info..... http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=slave

No we don't. It was to point out that we owe the first 150 years of our success to free labor moreso than capitalism itself. 

20 minutes ago, FordCosworth said:

History - in this case where the term " slave " ( something you injected into this thread ) originated from is only relevant if it suits your agenda huh? 

Comical coming from the guy who harbours so much white guilt, and blames only whitey for all the turmoil of yesterday, I'll take your comment with a grain of salt.

   

Good grief you are dense. I have no white guilt and this is not about slavery. Slavery is wrong no matter which society and race of people are involved. DUH!!! Get that through your dense skull already. My original point wasn't about slavery anyway in case you missed the obvious. It's about the U.S. owing a vast amount of its capitalist success over the first 150 years (which was brought up by hyper6 btw) to free and/or cheap labor. Guess you skimmed over the "Irish slave" part of my post too. White guilt? You are utterly clueless. 

 

Newsflash everyone. According to @FordCosworth, all slavery is wrong so to only point out white owned slavery is narrow minded even when that is not the damn point. Who would have imagined? 

Edited April 24, 2017 by surreal1272

[oldshurst442]

8 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

One wonders what the government of Venezuela plans to do with an auto manufacturing plant that has no parts suppliers.  At this point, it's just a large box on land.

condos?

Or maybe now that the Trump boys took over the family business..Trump Plaza Venezuela?

Edited April 24, 2017 by oldshurst442

[loki]

4 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

One wonders what the government of Venezuela plans to do with an auto manufacturing plant that has no parts suppliers.  At this point, it's just a large box on land.

warehouse, or worse.

1 minute ago, surreal1272 said:

No we don't. It was to point out that we owe the first 150 years of our success to free labor moreso than capitalism itself. 

i don't think that's how it works... slavery represses greater capital generation....

https://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-by-era/slavery-and-anti-slavery/resources/was-slavery-engine-american-economic-growth

http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2013/09/economic-history-2

but since we can't run this experiment, there can be no proof oneway or the other

[surreal1272]

1 minute ago, loki said:

warehouse, or worse.

i don't think that's how it works... slavery represses greater capital generation....

https://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-by-era/slavery-and-anti-slavery/resources/was-slavery-engine-american-economic-growth

http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2013/09/economic-history-2

but since we can't run this experiment, there can be no proof oneway or the other

I see what you are saying but even that article points out that there would be no US without slavery. Again though, that was not my point (I also pointed out child and underpaid labor in my original post on the subject). It was that capitalism owes a lot of its early success here to very shady and immoral practices. Again, refer to the history of the American railroad as a guide here. 

[FordCosworth]

23 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

Good grief you are dense. I have no white guilt and this is not about slavery. Slavery is wrong no matter which society and race of people are involved. DUH!!! Get that through your dense skull already. My original point wasn't about slavery anyway in case you missed the obvious. It's about the U.S. owing a vast amount of its capitalist success over the first 150 years (which was brought up by hyper6 btw) to free and/or cheap labor. Guess you skimmed over the "Irish slave" part of my post too. White guilt? You are utterly clueless. 

You say " its not about slavery "...

Yet you reply to Hyper with " It was to point out that we owe the first 150 years of our success to free labor moreso than capitalism itself. " 

Yet you claim I'm dence. 

* and now I see in another post ( to Hyper ) your opening sentence is...wait for it... referring to slavery...again.

 

Edited April 24, 2017 by FordCosworth

[surreal1272]

30 minutes ago, FordCosworth said:

You say " its not about slavery "...

Yet you reply to Hyper with " It was to point out that we owe the first 150 years of our success to free labor moreso than capitalism itself. " 

Yet you claim I'm dence. 

* and now I see in another post ( to Hyper ) your opening sentence is...wait for it... referring to slavery...again.

 

Slavery is the side bar to the point of capitalisms early success. If you interpret that any other way then that is your problem. You also glossed over the displacement of natives and the use of child labor after the industrial revolution but hey, keep focusing on the one irrelevant point. 

Edited April 24, 2017 by Drew Dowdell
removed namecalling

[FordCosworth]

I win...

When you can't debate without name calling, it is you that lost.

Debate 101

[loki]

19 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

I see what you are saying but even that article points out that there would be no US without slavery. Again though, that was not my point (I also pointed out child and underpaid labor in my original post on the subject). It was that capitalism owes a lot of its early success here to very shady and immoral practices. Again, refer to the history of the American railroad as a guide here. 

i gotcha. but this is lots of anecdotal comments., i've been doing it too.. sorta. lol

we can't change the past and it's an easy target to moralize or rationalize about stuff you had no chance to change. ...maybe this is why we are so militarily involved around the world...

the labor of the 1800's allowed for rapid expansion at the cost of many lives and liberties. there were also "child soldiers" of the civil war, the moralizing can't only be directed at "economic tyrants".. anyway......

 

6 minutes ago, FordCosworth said:

I win...

When you can't debate without name calling, it is you that lost.

Debate 101

 

kinda sad.. isn't it like saying i win at a staring contest? while it can't be disputed if both know they are playing... just sayin.   

[surreal1272]

15 minutes ago, FordCosworth said:

I win...

When you can't debate without name calling, it is you that lost.

Debate 101

Said the person who calls others "snowflakes" if they even hint at a liberal ideology. You lost before your first post when I triggered you to down vote a very valid and legitimate post, all because you feel I should have brought up all slavery (or mainly the Muslim owned slavery) when that was never the whole point. It was part of a very clearly laid out multi-faceted point   .

 

Your first post=trolling and deflection 101  

 

 

7 minutes ago, loki said:

i gotcha. but this is lots of anecdotal comments., i've been doing it too.. sorta. lol

we can't change the past and it's an easy target to moralize or rationalize about stuff you had no chance to change. ...maybe this is why we are so militarily involved around the world...

the labor of the 1800's allowed for rapid expansion at the cost of many lives and liberties. there were also "child soldiers" of the civil war, the moralizing can't only be directed at "economic tyrants".. anyway......

 

 

kinda sad.. isn't it like saying i win at a staring contest? while it can't be disputed if both know they are playing... just sayin.   

Yet he tries to point out name calling while calling me "narrow minded". Irony 101. Notice also that he depicted to the name calling accusation and had no valid rebuttal to my post. Classic deflection when you know you are wrong. 

Edited April 24, 2017 by surreal1272

[G. David Felt]

Crazy when what ever you want to call what happened in Venezuela be it socialism, dictatorship, communism, etc. has made life harder on the citizens and stopped to the point of rusting mess on infrastructure projects that would have brought a better way of life to them.

Case in point is the rotting dam left after American companies pulled out when the Socialist leader took over the oil companies and started to make state owned everything else.

This led to loss of thousands of jobs, not to mention the lack of electricity that would have been generated and available to the people.

[surreal1272]

1 minute ago, dfelt said:

Crazy when what ever you want to call what happened in Venezuela be it socialism, dictatorship, communism, etc. has made life harder on the citizens and stopped to the point of rusting mess on infrastructure projects that would have brought a better way of life to them.

Case in point is the rotting dam left after American companies pulled out when the Socialist leader took over the oil companies and started to make state owned everything else.

This led to loss of thousands of jobs, not to mention the lack of electricity that would have been generated and available to the people.

Those folks are in a world of hurt right now. It's a shame to have all those resources and have a group of greedy a-holes completely destroy it. 

[FordCosworth]

2 minutes ago, dfelt said:

Crazy when what ever you want to call what happened in Venezuela be it socialism, dictatorship, communism, etc. has made life harder on the citizens and stopped to the point of rusting mess on infrastructure projects that would have brought a better way of life to them.

Case in point is the rotting dam left after American companies pulled out when the Socialist leader took over the oil companies and started to make state owned everything else.

This led to loss of thousands of jobs, not to mention the lack of electricity that would have been generated and available to the people.

That could be mistaken for Detroit...

[Drew Dowdell]

30 minutes ago, FordCosworth said:

I win...

When you can't debate without name calling, it is you that lost.

Debate 101

You lost when you downvoted him for making factual statements. 

 

[surreal1272]

3 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

You lost when you downvoted him for making factual statements. 

 

[Drew Dowdell]

2 minutes ago, FordCosworth said:

That could be mistaken for Detroit...

Yeah, Capitalism did similar things to Detroit as well.  When they starting to put short term profits over long term product quality. When they started considering people disposable.  When they started moving jobs overseas because they forgot the lessons of Henry Ford; pay your workers a wage that they can afford the products they build.  You can head over to Detroit and survey the destruction of rampant capitalism all you want. 

[FordCosworth]

3 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

You lost when you downvoted him for making factual statements. 

 

What is it with you all whining about votes? 

[Drew Dowdell]

16 minutes ago, FordCosworth said:

What is it with you all whining about votes? 

The problem is when you and a select other few vote troll.  Meaning, someone who you don't like posts "Air contains oxygen" and you vote them down for it.  Unfortunately, this software doesn't have a mechanism for dealing with that sort of pettiness, so I have to spank you manually. 

[loki]

31 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

Yet he tries to point out name calling while calling me "narrow minded". Irony 101. Notice also that he depicted to the name calling accusation and had no valid rebuttal to my post. Classic deflection when you know you are wrong. 

narrow minded could be a criticism and not "name calling". not saying you're wrong...

15 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Yeah, Capitalism did similar things to Detroit as well.  When they starting to put short term profits over long term product quality. When they started considering people disposable.  When they started moving jobs overseas because they forgot the lessons of Henry Ford; pay your workers a wage that they can afford the products they build.  You can head over to Detroit and survey the destruction of rampant capitalism all you want. 

if capitalism did it to detroit, it's because investors thought there were better opportunities elsewhere. right or wrong, it's their $, so it's up to "them".

is there a post to refer FordC to for how REP is supposed to be used for?

 

12 minutes ago, FordCosworth said:

What is it with you all whining about votes? 

i sometimes use votes in redit for like, but i know it's not supposed to be like that.
this isn't facebook.  I've been the target of Drew's wrath too, but it's been like.. 4+ years?  i've also not be very active here for like 2 years either.

[surreal1272]

1 minute ago, loki said:

narrow minded could be a criticism and not "name calling". not saying you're wrong...

if capitalism did it to detroit, it's because investors thought there were better opportunities elsewhere. right or wrong, it's their $, so it's up to "them".

is there a post to refer FordC to for how REP is supposed to be used for?

 

i sometimes use votes in redit for like, but i know it's not supposed to be like that.
this isn't facebook.  I've been the target of Drew's wrath too, but it's been like.. 4+ years?  i've also not be very active here for like 2 years either.

No worries on my end. I got what you were saying. The issue has been dealt with and I'm fine with it. 

[Drew Dowdell]

Voting is going to change in a few months anyway.  I"ve been testing out version 4.2 of the software and it has "reactions" rather than voting up or down.

[G. David Felt]

30 minutes ago, FordCosworth said:

What is it with you all whining about votes? 

I see voting up or down as one way to agree or disagree with a persons comments. In civil society, most people who up vote might or might not make a comment and move on and people accept this. We all like to feel good.

In civil society, when you downvote, it is expected that you would also post your thoughts on why it is a down vote and not just vote down. As stated by others this is seen as vote trolling.

We here at C&G encourage all forms of discussion and debate and only ask that if you are going to downvote someone, then post why you disagree with them. Fairness and integrity is all that is being asked of posters to this forum and that you at least respect even if you disagree with what people post.

We will never always agree on everything but we can agree to disagree seeing each others views and still move forward. This is civil society and what I expect and I imagine many others here expect also.

16 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Voting is going to change in a few months anyway.  I"ve been testing out version 4.2 of the software and it has "reactions" rather than voting up or down.

Sounds like a more civil way to debate.

[loki]

27 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Voting is going to change in a few months anyway.  I"ve been testing out version 4.2 of the software and it has "reactions" rather than voting up or down.

any chance my bad rep will go away or be drastically reduced?   those are like from another lifetime. lol

[ccap41]

26 minutes ago, dfelt said:

Sounds like a more civil way to debate

People will get their panties ruffled if there is any hint of negativity regardless..

1 hour ago, FordCosworth said:

What is it with you all whining about votes? 

I couldn't agree more. I've never understood it.

57 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

The problem is when you and a select other few vote troll.  Meaning, someone who you don't like posts "Air contains oxygen" and you vote them down for it.  Unfortunately, this software doesn't have a mechanism for dealing with that sort of pettiness, so I have to spank you manually. 

BECAUSE IT ACTUALLY GETS TO PEOPLE!

But whhhhhhhy??? Why do people get actually upset and disgruntled by a little red arrow on the internet from people you've never met? WTF is wrong with people?

I'll take all of @loki's red votes if it makes loki sleep better at night..lol

Uhhh topic... uhhhh GM makes car..but not in Venezuela anymore.

Edited April 24, 2017 by ccap41

[FordCosworth]

30 minutes ago, dfelt said:

I see voting up or down as one way to agree or disagree with a persons comments. In civil society, most people who up vote might or might not make a comment and move on and people accept this. We all like to feel good.

In civil society, when you downvote, it is expected that you would also post your thoughts on why it is a down vote and not just vote down. As stated by others this is seen as vote trolling.

We here at C&G encourage all forms of discussion and debate and only ask that if you are going to downvote someone, then post why you disagree with them. Fairness and integrity is all that is being asked of posters to this forum and that you at least respect even if you disagree with what people post.

We will never always agree on everything but we can agree to disagree seeing each others views and still move forward. This is civil society and what I expect and I imagine many others here expect also.

Sounds like a more civil way to debate.

" In civil society, when you downvote, it is expected that you would also post your thoughts on why it is a down vote and not just vote down. As stated by others this is seen as vote trolling. "

I get downvoted, with no explanation for as to why. I don't go off the rails and into the deep end. It doesn't phase me whatsoever. If a little red arrow on some forum hits them that hard...

 

 

15 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

People will get their panties ruffled if there is any hint of negativity regardless..

I couldn't agree more. I've never understood it.

BECAUSE IT ACTUALLY GETS TO PEOPLE!

But whhhhhhhy??? Why do people get actually upset and disgruntled by a little red arrow on the internet from people you've never met? WTF is wrong with people?

I'll take all of @loki's red votes if it makes loki sleep better at night..lol

Uhhh topic... uhhhh GM makes car..but not in Venezuela anymore.

+ 1 ( my voting rights have been suspended ) 

[G. David Felt]

24 minutes ago, loki said:

any chance my bad rep will go away or be drastically reduced?   those are like from another lifetime. lol

It is slowly going down! 

@FordCosworth I understand your point your stating as I also do not get upset by a red arrow. I do like to know why someone thought to downvote me but to each their own. Not gonna worry about it and just move on. My Wine Glass is Half Full!

[loki]

20 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

I'll take all of @loki's red votes if it makes loki sleep better at night..lol

.

 

2 minutes ago, dfelt said:

It is slowly going down! 

are you 2 conspiring against me? lol

[G. David Felt]

Just now, loki said:

 

are you 2 conspiring against me? lol

 Your Funny!

[loki]

Just now, dfelt said:

 Your Funny!

* You're *

[Drew Dowdell]

34 minutes ago, loki said:

any chance my bad rep will go away or be drastically reduced?   those are like from another lifetime. lol

I can Zero you out if you want to start from scratch

[surreal1272]

39 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

People will get their panties ruffled if there is any hint of negativity regardless..

I couldn't agree more. I've never understood it.

BECAUSE IT ACTUALLY GETS TO PEOPLE!

But whhhhhhhy??? Why do people get actually upset and disgruntled by a little red arrow on the internet from people you've never met? WTF is wrong with people?

I'll take all of @loki's red votes if it makes loki sleep better at night..lol

Uhhh topic... uhhhh GM makes car..but not in Venezuela anymore.

Getting down voted is one thing. However, as it has already been pointed out by the mods, when you go out of your way to troll someone or a subject without any contribution to the subject, then it becomes a problem. If you don't see a problem with that kind of trolling, then you are part of the problem (and no I am not talking about you ccap41, just in general). I also take issue with people who down vote the same posters, over and over, regardless of content. It has been proven tenfold here. I had two (not naming names) that went at me nonstop for a month last year with two downvotes a day. That is what leads me to where I am today regarding this. I think the upcoming changes will be a better fit here and cause far less headaches.

 

What is interesting is the narcissistic way of which some people conduct themselves while accepting zero responsibility for their actions. I have taken my lumps and I have been forthright with the mods when there has been an issue with my actions. I know when I've messed up or gone too far. Others should learn to do the same. 

 

Thats is just my opinion and don't take it as a gospel truth.

Edited April 24, 2017 by surreal1272

[hyperv6]

15 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

it's utterly ridiculous and a failure of our education system that this thread even exists.  The number of falsehoods in @hyperv6 post from 8 hours ago is enough to make any 6th grade teacher want to quit their job and go be a sniper instead.

Puritans did NOT come to the the new world to escape persecution. You apparently never learned anything about them beyond the cartoony 4th grade level.   The Puritans came here because they weren't allowed to persecute to the level they wanted to.  King Charles I, who himself was not afraid to have people killed for not adhering to a rather strict faith, had to tell the Puritans to knock it off with the persecution of other religions.  So in an effort to be as strict as possible they decided to break away from England.  Even when they came to the new world, the Puritans would execute followers of other faiths.  So let's make sure we get the facts straight.... the Puritans were the contemporary equivalent of Wahhabism type of Islam.  

Just to correct at least one of the falsehoods in that long post. 

Drew my people were not Puritans for your information. My great times what ever grandfather  and his brothers and father came here as Quakers in the mid 1600's. He even was buddies with William Penn. His name was Andrew Job Jr.  Look it up he has a large web site on the web. That is how I learned much of him and his wife's family.

So before you try to trash me with your own bull $h! you had better get your facts straight. Puritans were much earlier. Also FYI not everyone who came here was a Puritan but you should know that since you claim to be so smart.

The fact is Quakers were persecuted in the 1600's in England and settled in PA and along the east coast. He worked hard to try to stop the abuse of the Native Indians and prevent the sale of Alcohol to them that was creating major issues in their tribes.

And don't tell me the Quakers were like Islam either. Different faiths and different situations.

The family descended from the Norsemen in France and moved to England. They became a line of the Aristocracy and converted to Quakerism later. They lost their standing and came here to follow their faith in PA and many followed them as time went on.

My descendent became a sheriff, a leader in their church, Tavern owner and owned many other business. He was born on the boat on the way over and was sent back to England for his education. He returned and represented William Penn in boarder disputes with Lord Baltimore.

So you need to correct your false hoods talking about something you have no connection to and no idea about.

As for his family they continued to move south and they ended up in eastern TN where they help usher in state hood serving there as Militia.  No one gave them anything and they had to make it on their own.

And before you get this wrong too No I am not a Quaker present day. That disappeared from the family years ago.

Also the Quakers  http://www.hallvworthington.com/Persecutions/whypersecutions.html There are many other documented sites to choose from too.

FYI the Quakers as a whole as normally practiced did not execute their members or kill anyone. Because they never fought back is why they took so much BS thought out history.  But they were willing to die for what they believed.

 

 

[surreal1272]

4 minutes ago, hyperv6 said:

Drew my people were not Puritans for your information. My great times what ever grandfather  and his brothers and father came here as Quakers in the mid 1600's. He even was buddies with William Penn. His name was Andrew Job Jr.  Look it up he has a large web site on the web. That is how I learned much of him and his wife's family.

So before you try to trash me with your own bull $h! you had better get your facts straight. Puritans were much earlier. Also FYI not everyone who came here was a Puritan but you should know that since you claim to be so smart.

The fact is Quakers were persecuted in the 1600's in England and settled in PA and along the east coast. He worked hard to try to stop the abuse of the Native Indians and prevent the sale of Alcohol to them that was creating major issues in their tribes.

And don't tell me the Quakers were like Islam either. Different faiths and different situations.

The family descended from the Norsemen in France and moved to England. They became a line of the Aristocracy and converted to Quakerism later. They lost their standing and came here to follow their faith in PA and many followed them as time went on.

My descendent became a sheriff, a leader in their church, Tavern owner and owned many other business. He was born on the boat on the way over and was sent back to England for his education. He returned and represented William Penn in boarder disputes with Lord Baltimore.

So you need to correct your false hoods talking about something you have no connection to and no idea about.

As for his family they continued to move south and they ended up in eastern TN where they help usher in state hood serving there as Militia.  No one gave them anything and they had to make it on their own.

And before you get this wrong too No I am not a Quaker present day. That disappeared from the family years ago.

Also the Quakers  http://www.hallvworthington.com/Persecutions/whypersecutions.html There are many other documented sites to choose from too.

FYI the Quakers as a whole as normally practiced did not execute their members or kill anyone. Because they never fought back is why they took so much BS thought out history.  But they were willing to die for what they believed.

 

 

He did not say anything about your family being Puritans. You said this,

 

"Not being doom and gloom here but my family came here in the 1600's to escape pusicution in Europe. They had to take care of them selves as no one else would. It made them tougher, smarter and self sufishiant."

 

The 1600s were all about the Puritans hence Drew's response. 

[hyperv6]

4 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

@hyperv6--You spoke of the 150 years of pure capitalism building this country prior to the New Deal. Does that include the same capitalism responsible for the railroad industry that ran rough shod accross this country, displacing Native Americans while being built by Chinese and Mexican slave labor? How about our vast agriculture that was made successful by African American slave labor? Or how about the budding industrial revolution which led to such fine labor practices such as child labor and Irish slave labor? I can go on if you'd like but I am curious as to which part of early American capitalism should we owe our "success"? This country was built by economic tyrants.

 

We won't even get into you Puritan statements since Drew covered the bases there. f@#king puritans, a group so uptight that England said "get the f@#k out".

It is no wonder we are so F*$&. So many have no clue about the past. Puritans well I hate to tell you they were only a small part of the people who came to this country. 

As for past sins it is what is as you can not measure what they did by the same standards today. It was a different world and many thing happened from power and right of conquest. Was it right by todays standards no but that is how things were. The world and life has evolved over the years and you can not judge the past by the same standards you can only make sure you do not repeat the past sins.

 

[Drew Dowdell]

1 minute ago, hyperv6 said:

It is no wonder we are so F*$&. So many have no clue about the past. Puritans well I hate to tell you they were only a small part of the people who came to this country. 

As for past sins it is what is as you can not measure what they did by the same standards today. It was a different world and many thing happened from power and right of conquest. Was it right by todays standards no but that is how things were. The world and life has evolved over the years and you can not judge the past by the same standards you can only make sure you do not repeat the past sins.

 

You're the one who brought up the Puritans man..... you got your facts wrong about them escaping religious persecution.

On the point of the Quakers.. of which I am a descendant as well, I concede that yes they were being persecuted in England... but they were NOT the Mayflower pilgrims. 

[surreal1272]

Just now, hyperv6 said:

It is no wonder we are so F*$&. So many have no clue about the past. Puritans well I hate to tell you they were only a small part of the people who came to this country. 

As for past sins it is what is as you can not measure what they did by the same standards today. It was a different world and many thing happened from power and right of conquest. Was it right by todays standards no but that is how things were. The world and life has evolved over the years and you can not judge the past by the same standards you can only make sure you do not repeat the past sins.

 

Sorry but you are deflecting. "Was it right by today's standards"? That is irrelevant to the claim you made that this country survived off of capitalism for the first 150 years. My response was a factual counter because that "success" was built off the backs of the poor, the slaves, and a relentless pursuit of greed by people of power (see the history of the railroad for reference here). 

 

And way to insult the collective intelligence here with your first two sentences. Seems like you are the one who needs a clue here. 

[hyperv6]

1 minute ago, surreal1272 said:

He did not say anything about your family being Puritans. You said this,

 

"Not being doom and gloom here but my family came here in the 1600's to escape pusicution in Europe. They had to take care of them selves as no one else would. It made them tougher, smarter and self sufishiant."

 

The 1600s were all about the Puritans hence Drew's response. 

Sorry but they were only a small part of who came here.

Drew assumed Puritans when went on a rant fully off base as he never took the time to gather the facts before he went off. Just line many other things.

Don't bother to replay as it may be a while if I ever come back here. Like many others that have left I think my time as come.

[surreal1272]

Just now, hyperv6 said:

Sorry but they were only a small part of who came here.

Drew assumed Puritans when went on a rant fully off base as he never took the time to gather the facts before he went off. Just line many other things.

Don't bother to replay as it may be a while if I ever come back here. Like many others that have left I think my time as come.

See ya'

 

No offense but it just seems like you are more concerned with being right and lording over everyone with your vast knowledge than actually listening to what others are saying. 

[hyperv6]

2 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

You're the one who brought up the Puritans man..... you got your facts wrong about them escaping religious persecution.

On the point of the Quakers.. of which I am a descendant as well, I concede that yes they were being persecuted in England... but they were NOT the Mayflower pilgrims. 

Look again never said brought up the Puritans.  Get it right.

[FordCosworth]

18 minutes ago, hyperv6 said:

It is no wonder we are so F*$&. So many have no clue about the past. Puritans well I hate to tell you they were only a small part of the people who came to this country. 

As for past sins it is what is as you can not measure what they did by the same standards today. It was a different world and many thing happened from power and right of conquest. Was it right by todays standards no but that is how things were. The world and life has evolved over the years and you can not judge the past by the same standards you can only make sure you do not repeat the past sins.

 

+ 1

[ccap41]

1 hour ago, dfelt said:

It is slowly going down! 

@FordCosworth I understand your point your stating as I also do not get upset by a red arrow. I do like to know why someone thought to downvote me but to each their own. Not gonna worry about it and just move on. My Wine Glass is Half Full!

You seem awfully one-sided with the voting thing. It doesn't matter why somebody gives your the +1, you just take it and run. But if it's a -1 you need an explanation.

Not just you, everybody who asks for an explanation for their -1's never complain about why they didn't get an explanation about their +1.

Edited April 24, 2017 by ccap41

[surreal1272]

@hyperv6--Remember. You brought up capitalism as the reason for this country's early success while clearly ignoring or just dismissing how it got there, hence my initial reply to you. What is f@#ked in this country is when you ignore certain parts of history to suit an agenda as you have done here (with the support of others who have a selective memory of how this country was built). 

[ccap41]

51 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

I also take issue with people who down vote the same posters, over and over,

The way the system is, at this point, you only get one a day so if you disagree and give that same person the downvote but can't the other 5 people it looks like you're singled out but you just don't have 5 more to give.

Also, why? Why do you care about somebody who 1: you claim to not care about. 2: its the internet 3: you and them literally receive nothing from a +/-1 .

[Drew Dowdell]

2 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

The way the system is, at this point, you only get one a day so if you disagree and give that same person the downvote but can't the other 5 people it looks like you're singled out but you just don't have 5 more to give.

Also, why? Why do you care about somebody who 1: you claim to not care about. 2: its the internet 3: you and them literally receive nothing from a +/-1 .

I think the issue is with the why and when people are getting downvoted.  If you get downvoted for something like one of Hyper's long posts that is full of opinion and such, sure, that can be valid if you're simply disagreeing with that poster. 

There is a small group of posters here who will downvote a post simply because of who posted it.  It could be something as simple as "Air contains Oxygen" and they get downvoted for it.  That is what causes the irritation. Downvoting out of pettiness and personal vindictiveness is the problem... not downvoting due to disagreement.

Most of the time, if I downvote someone, I'll also reply as to why I disagree.

I'll also point out that the people who are doing the downvoting out of vindictiveness are the ones who ruined the system and forced me to put a limit on how many downvotes they could make in a day.  Those people were going through and downvoting EVERY POST certain people made without regard for the content of the post. They either didn't realize or didn't care that I can see all of their activity on the site.  They would log in and do nothing but downvote a particular person and then leave. They are, in fact, Downvote Trolls... doing so specifically, and immaturely, to irritate other users of this website.  One of them was already found guilty of other high crimes and misdemeanors, and consequently executed. Another has seemly left the site. A third is currently on a severely restricted probation.

[FordCosworth]

" There is a small group of posters here who will downvote a post simply because of who posted it.  It could be something as simple as "Air contains Oxygen" and they get downvoted for it.  That is what causes the irritation. Downvoting out of pettiness and personal vindictiveness is the problem... not downvoting due to disagreement. "

Happens to me all the time...It means nothing to me. I don't cry over it like a perpetual child. 

Theres a saying...