Car Mp3 Quran Player

eMarketing by Connect Marketing Services (388,779 Email Addresses - 98% All Over Pakistan)





This email is Broadcast by a marketing company "Connect Marketing Services". If you no longer
wish to receive promotion emails, please click to unsubscribe. For customer service inquiry please email or call us.
We are not responsible for any commitment made by the advertiser. Connect Marketing Services will be fully responsible for this activity only.
 
©2011 Connect Marketing Services -All rights reserved. Terms and Prices are subject to change.

**JP** AAJ K COLUMN 23APRIL'2011

ASSALAM-O-ALAIKUM

AUR

SUBAH BAKHAIR.
 

Kashif Chatha

Sheikhupura.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "JoinPakistan" group.
You all are invited to come and share your information with other group members.
To post to this group, send email to joinpakistan@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com.pk/group/joinpakistan?hl=en?hl=en
You can also visit our blog site : www.joinpakistan.blogspot.com &
on facebook http://www.facebook.com/pages/Join-Pakistan/125610937483197

America’s Greatness Requires War and Taxes ?

It Just Ain't So
America's Greatness Requires War and Taxes?
By Aeon J. Skoble • April 2011
Posted April 21, 2011

New York Times columnist David Brooks thinks America is great but in trouble, and he wants to take steps to preserve American preeminence. He's right, though not in the way he thinks. In his November 11, 2010, column Brooks argued that we need some sort of National Greatness Agenda; the problem is that his conception of what makes us great is incoherent.

Brooks does identify some real problems: for instance, that competition between the two major parties has become "fratricidal" and theatrical, and that it is creating massive budget deficits that, left unchecked, will prove catastrophic. But his diagnosis of the problem and his proposed solutions are fraught with fallacies.

He thinks that a revived patriotism will "lift people out of their partisan cliques," yet the current partisan tribalism seems not to be lacking in patriotism. As is often the case, much hangs on how one understands the terms.

What makes a country great? One way to answer this involves claiming that there is something special about the ethnic makeup of the people who comprise it. For Mussolini there was something great, something special, about being Italian; his allies in Germany and Japan had similar theories about their respective nationalities. But that approach won't quite work for America since it comprises people of many ethnicities.

Another way to understand national greatness is in terms of institutions and operating principles. But institutions and principles can change. What would make a country great on this model would be to have great institutions grounded in great principles. The Declaration of Independence is an example of this approach: Begin with a set of principles (moral equality of all persons, the natural right to live and be free, power only justified by consent) and then appeal to it when creating institutions (limited government of enumerated powers, republican structure with a democratic franchise, church-state separation, citizen militia, free trade). On this model America is great inasmuch as its institutions reflect its principles. A nation that claims to be dedicated to the principles outlined in the Declaration fails to be great when it invades foreign lands, abuses its citizens' liberties, or forbids the free movement of people and goods.

Brooks's exhortations reveal a lack of clarity about different senses of greatness, which comes out most clearly in his repeated use of false dichotomies. He asks, for example, "Do you really love your tax deduction more than America's future greatness?" This alternative presupposes that it is only through higher taxes that a nation can become great. This in turn assumes that national greatness is only measured by things done by the government. What might these be? Scholarly, artistic, and technological greatness might well be better fostered by individuals having more money and freedom.

"Are you really unwilling," he asks, "to sacrifice your Social Security cost-of-living adjustment at a time when soldiers and Marines are sacrificing their lives for their country in Afghanistan?" It's not clear that solving other countries' problems is how we measure our own greatness. In any event, this question also reveals a confusion: equating national greatness with government spending. Instead of asking whether Social Security payouts should rise with inflation, we might ask whether we would be better off as a nation of financially independent and responsible people who didn't look to the political system for retirement income. Instead of wondering how high taxes have to be to fund overseas military campaigns, we might ask whether those campaigns need to be undertaken by the government (as opposed to either being undertaken by privateers or not at all). One way to measure American greatness might be the extent to which we exemplify peace and prosperity. The best way to achieve those ends would be to limit (or even better, eliminate) coercive interference with other people's lives.


Lost Preeminence

Brooks laments a lost preeminence, but it isn't clear what he means by that. He might be referring to a late-1940s preeminence, when America, having helped destroy the Nazis and their Japanese allies, led the way in rebuilding those nations and helping them become prosperous liberal democracies. But today's "nation-building" looks very different. Unlike World War II, which actually ended, the current wars of nation-building seem perpetual, which suggests that a different course of action might have better results.

Or perhaps Brooks is referring to a time when American preeminence was measured in contrast to the privations of the old Soviet Union. In that case, let's review the lessons of that contrast: Our former adversaries in the communist world were impoverished because tyranny doesn't work as well as freedom. Besides the soul-crushing dehumanization of a system that doesn't recognize fundamental liberties, the centrally planned socialist economic system turned out to be incapable of generating an abundance of goods and services. So if Brooks wants to see American preeminence regained, he might do better to promote liberalization of the world's economic systems, which, again, is best done by example.

Brooks's general rhetorical approach is to frame the debate between "liberals" and "conservatives" as a stubbornness game in which both sides must yield in order to bring about "a governing philosophy that believes in targeted federal efforts to arouse growth, social mobility and responsibility." As it happens, the free-enterprise system does precisely these things, but most politicians can't understand that this requires not action on their part, but inaction. They must stop interfering with people's lives, not look for new ways to do it; protect liberty not abridge it. Brooks fallaciously conflates subsidies with tax reductions, but this implies that people are not the owners of their property. If the government takes money from Peter and gives it to Paul, that's a subsidy to Paul. But if the government takes less money from Peter, that's not a subsidy to Peter, since it's Peter's property to begin with. Brooks's calls to end subsidies are correct, but the word doesn't mean what he thinks it does.

In a way, then, Brooks is right: America has lost some of its greatness and needs to take steps to regain it.

But the problem isn't people who want to bring the troops home or keep more of their money. Indeed, bringing the troops home would make it easier for people to keep more of their money. So would ending drug prohibition. So would allowing free trade and free human migration. National greatness, American-style, does not consist of the storied pomp of ancient lands, but rather of the opportunities illuminated by the lamp of liberty.

http://www.thefreemanonline.org/departments/it-just-aint-so/america%E2%80%99s-greatness-requires-war-and-taxes/?utm_source=The+Freeman&utm_campaign=849e9a19d0-Freeman_Jan2010_Issue&utm_medium=email

**JP** A DEEP SIGH

A DEEP SIGH

Respectable Sir,

As you know the recent flood of 2010 was the horrible flood of the history of  Pakistan.  This flood has brought great disaster in our area.  There is no example of such disaster before it.  Those richest people who help other people and with their help poor people able to live, after the flood they also became homeless and helpless.  The land owners who lived in big villas now live under open sky. 

I can’t explain those horrible scenes that I see with my own eyes.

Our town was situated at river Sind’s Taunsa Barrage   north side where the bank of river destroyed.  Due to this broken of river`s bank the direction water follow of water was very fast and it destroyed everything.  Many people was died in this storm, lot of women became widow and many innocent children became orphan. The livelihood of people in our town was harvest crops and cattle having but after flood there are no cattle remain and the land became collection of sand and crops destroyed.

Government of Pakistan try to help the flood effected people but this process has not done properly.  Political people use these funds for their own purpose and gave only their own people.  Poor and needy people were remaining helpless.

NGOs has also worked for the relief of flood affected people.  But due to the unconsciousness of NGOs, clever people who were not rightful for this aid, fulfill their own and their relatives benefits.

In this list I mention such widows who have no source of living and the name of such orphan children who has deprived the basic necessities of life.

Most respectable sir I request you to the help of these widows, orphan and needy people for the survival  of flood effected people you to provide them flats, Homes, House hood things, Food and also provide them agricultural ornament and Tractor for grow their crops again. Please make a system of monthly funds for widows.

Dear sir I request you again to solve some problem in these problems.

 

 

May  Help You To Succeed... Ameen

 

 

 

M. ATHAR NAEEM QURESHI. CELL NO.0092 -  0331 6007577

TIBBA MUSTAQIL GARBI, DAIRA DIN PANAH. TEHSIL: KOT ADDU. DIST: MUZAFFERGARH.

 

 

 

 

**JP** Drone Attack and Pak Army

As we all are aware few days ago our Interior Ministery and Airforce Chief told that "we are now closing monitoring the border and  no drone attack will be occur in future but after that statement they have done 2 drone attack in first more than 55 innocent Pakistani peoples died and their current drone attack more than 20 peoples died, now where is our missile system and air fighter to whom we are paying huge salary for our defence???????

 

 اگر پاک آرمی پاکستانیوں کا تحافظ نہں کر سکتی تو کیا ضرورت ہے اس آرمی کی جو صرف مفت کی روٹیاں توڑ رہی ہے؟

 

 

Shame on Pak Army and Shame on our Politicians.  BEGHARAT LOOG.