This Trust Symposium was about press coverage, opinion polls, government...and
tangentially religious institutions.As it turns out, it was a FAIL
for one reason.I watched the video (all 1 hour and 42 minutes of it)
and added my comments to those present late last night.I come on the
D-News today and find all the comments gone, and no way to make comments now.Not exactly a way to develop trust, is it?
Thid Barker - Victor, IDJan. 15, 2019 2:34 p.m."Other
people's money does not belong to you! You have no right to prosper from
other people's labor!"What are you talking about? What
individual says that your money belongs to them? You make no sense. As for
others profiting off of another's labor, isn't that what
"capitalism" is all about? You work and someone else profits from your
labor. Of course, you get paid for your work, but nothing like the person
profiting. Wages have remained pretty much stagnant while the top 1% have made
out like gangbusters. However, if you're talking about tax
policy, then I urge you to read the Constitution as to the governments rights to
tax goods and services. Now, if you have a complaint about paying your fair
share, then take that up with your congressperson or senator. And if you
don't like the majority of people supporting specific tax policy, then you
obviously don't approve of the democratic process.In any case,
perhaps you are paid too much for your specific labor and need to take a pay
cut? You can move to a state with lower wages, lower taxes, and less benefits.
If 'trust' is the supposed 'currency' of government, then
the American people have seen it as bankrupt for the past couple of decades.
Who in his right mind would trust the government to do anything right? The
military, um, perhaps. Congress and the president? Rarely, if ever.
unrepentant progressive: Other people's money does not belong to you! You
have no right to prosper from other people's labor! It called stealing, no
matter who does it! The only way you are entitled to other people's money
is if they GIVE it to you! You can not take it, that's stealing!
"The key here is that you can never trust any politician that promises you
something for nothing!"Well, I certainly agree with that.
However, has this writer every considered tax breaks for the wealthy, reducing
revenue and therefore causing deficits? As in something for nothing, actually
less than nothing as in deficit.It is not only your pejorative
'progressive' who seemingly 'promises something for
Thid Barker - Victor, IDJan. 15, 2019 9:17 a.m."People who
trust the government to control their lives are not called citizens, they are
called subjects!"And there is the conundrum. Social
conservatives and the religious-right demand government control people's
lives where they want. You may understand this if you were a libertarian
demanding minimal government beyond civil and military defense, but that can get
pretty dicey when you consider involuntary serviced through a military draft in
times of war, as example, and other issues requiring citizen participation.Social conservatives appear to want maximum government control of our
lives when it comes to issues of abortions rights, "religious freedom",
sexuality, what is taught in our public schools, and other concerns vital to
their conservative worldview. We see this at its maximum in the debate about a
woman's right to make her own decisions regarding her own body. The zealots
want government intimately involved in her ability to decide how her body is
used.Certainly this is a complex issue and will be debated for
generations to come: How much government do we need? There are many factors that
need be considered.
Thid Barker - Victor, IDJan. 15, 2019 9:17 a.m."In general
terms . . . loss of liberty at the hands of either foreign despots or domestic
criminals." Ezra T. Benson "People who trust the government
to control their lives are not called citizens, they are called subjects!
"No American trusts or wants government to control their lives.
That is an absurd statement. Instead of quoting Ezra Taft Benson, you should be
referencing the Constitution itself. "We the People of the
United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure
domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general
Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do
ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of States".Benson had no more insight into the purpose of government than any other
ultra-conservative giving their opinion of "limited government" . If you
read the preamble correctly, you will see what the Founders intended " . . .
establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,
promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of . . . [more]1 of 2
[continued]2 of 2" . . . Liberty to ourselves and
our Posterity." You will see that this document, this covenent, provides for
much more than "defence" and "publlic safety". Many
conservatives miss this and re-write the Constitution for their own purpose.Another point that needs to be made in reference to your statement.
When the Constitution talks about the "protection of property", it is
not talking about protecting your home, your car, or your smart phone. It is a
statement providing for protections for slavery. Most people understood this in
the early 19th Century and it was often referenced by leaders in the antebellum
South leading up to the Civil War. Since the Southern delegation to
the Constitution Convention did not write directly protections for their most
important social and economic institution, they couched it in language that only
referenced "property rights" instead of "preserving slavery".
This was in clear violation of the basic tenet of the Constitution that "all
men are created equal" and caused people like Thomas Jefferson and John
Adams great distress. It took 75 years to right this wrong. Then it took another
100 years to put it into effect.
The key here is that you can never trust any politician that promises you
something for nothing! Promising free stuff means one group will be forced to
work for that which they will not receive so another group will receive that for
which they did not work! We used to call that slavery but today its called
RedShirt - USS Enterprise, UTJan. 15, 2019 10:15 a.m."Ironically, since Trump was elected there is actually MORE trust in the
government."Ah, the humor in that statement. Where are you
getting your information? When over 75% of the American people don't want
Trump's Wall and a majority don't approve of Donald Trump (he
consistently polls in the mid-thirties), it would be interesting to see your
numbers showing that there is MORE trust in government. Unless you're only
polling your friends of like mind, nowhere else do we see this man as
trustworthy, much less capable and fit.Although the recent news
about Trump being under investigation as a Russian asset by the FBI and the fact
that he doesn't want any information about his meetings with Vladimir Putin
getting outside (Trump only lets the Russians to make transcripts), we are yet
to see these stories on the front pages of the DesNews. However, the only thing
we can trust is that Trump will always align himself with Russian interests and
go to great lengths to protect his secret relationship with Putin.It's hard to have trust when the man leading our government in an
incorrigible liar and demands his staff lie for him.
Rather a wall is needed is irrelevant. The government should be functioning
while negotiations take place.
To "Elsleuith" Germany had a wall and it worked. The White House has a
fence around it, and it works. Most high ranking Democrats live in fenced
neighborhoods, and those fences work. Various reports from the southern border
show that it works.All you are doing is repeating Democrat talking
points.To "Daedalus, Stephen" the lack of trust in
government started 50 years ago. Ironically, since Trump was elected there is
actually MORE trust in the government.
Headline: "Trust is the 'currency of government' and it's
hard to earn in Washington"Trust? The currency of
government?Another couple secret Trump-Putin meetings and it may
well be rubles...
"In general terms, therefore, the proper role of government includes such
defensive activities, as maintaining national military and local police forces
for protection against loss of life, loss of property, and loss of liberty at
the hands of either foreign despots or domestic criminals." Ezra T. Benson
People who trust the government to control their lives are not
called citizens, they are called subjects! Protect our borders and streets,
deliver the mail and stay out of our lives and never trust anyone who tell you
they can govern your life better than you!
Grandstanding is not government. This shut down is absurd. China had a wall and
it didn't work, neither will a Mexico wall. Totally unneeded. No wonder
Americans don't trust their own government.
While I would dearly love to point out the many actions of the President which
leave the majority of Americans wary of trusting the man, he is only a symptom
of a larger diseases in the body politic.We seem to have found ways
to send people to the halls of power who don't really want to represent the
interests of their constituents. So many of our elected officials at all levels
of government seem unwilling to be servants of the people elected to do good for
the public.Rather, we have a large cadre of Governors, Senators,
Representatives and others who are in office to amass power, and who seem to
serve the special interests that paid for their elections.How is the
American public ever going to trust government, when the people we select to be
our voice cater slavishly to their own careers to accrue power and payback their
donors for the dollars spent on their campaign?Honesty aside.
Comraderie and respect for another opinion as well. We don't have people
in the state capitols nor in Washington who see their job as a public servant
and voice for the average person.
Trust in this Congress? It would be safer to trust a rattlesnake.