|
Obama about to make speech (pg. 13)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| The17sss |
| quote: | Originally posted by Clovis
The thing is, it isn't just a difference of opinion. I disagree with plenty of people that I don't mind, such as yourself.
The ideology, viewpoint, and perspective that Rush espouses is incongruent with reality, largely made up, and morally flawed. It is harmful. It breeds hate and disagreement where there shouldn't be any. |
This is exactly how I feel but in the opposite direction... the class envy fostered by the democrats is what espouses hate. The group politics of labeling people as this or that, and pitting them against each other is what breeds hate. Capitalism does not identify skin color or race or gender, and allows anyone to succeed to whatever degree they choose.
| quote: | Everything in that paragraph you posted is a lie. It is simply not true. There's no nation of people sitting on their ing butts enjoying a steady diet of government cheese and jumping for joy at the stimulus package and Obama's plans. Thats just ing horse , and frankly, an insult to the thousands of hard working people in this country facing some of the toughest times of their lives and just trying to get by and move ahead, who need every bit of help they can get.
Being on unemployment is not ing fun. Unemployment doesn't ing pay rent for most people. It doesn't give folks a comfortable free ride. Not having health care isn't a joy filled affair either. |
Nobody is saying they enjoy living that life... cleary they don't because they are perpetually unhappy. It is absolutely not an insult to those who bust their ass and work in the hopes of giving their kids and themselves a better life. The point being made is that it is easier to take a handout if its there than to work hard to achieve. Just like it's easier to beat a child than to raise it. It creats a culture of dependency that just begets more and more of the same. And it's true that some people, even if it won't change their life for the better, get excited when they see people at the top cut down to size.
The ever expanding welfare state we are seeing now strips away incentive... hell, people are afraid to make more than $250K now, including small businesses which I shall attest to is NOT wealthy if you own and operate a small business. Reliance on government assistance is what kills the entrepreneurial spirit, and leads to the misery of living on government handouts. What is truly sickening is seeing how much more people think they are entitled to each day... be it from the government or from those who work hard to be at the top of their profession. Where is the personal responsibility anymore? People can't afford a house, it... give them a mortgage. People can't pay that mortgate? it, they have "a right to have a house" so we'll just punish those who play by the rules to hook up the irresponsible.
| quote: | | And so people who live very comfortably are being asked to give a tiny bit more to help the greater good of the entire country, of the people who are struggling on the bottom. When in s name did this idea become so vilified and horrible? There isn't some ing giant middle class content on not making much money and looking to tax rebates for their big break. |
But that's not the case anymore man. A little bit more? A miniscule 2% of the people who file tax returns are paying 62% of ALL INCOME TAXES... what do you consider enough? About 40% of the working popluation do not even pay taxes. You don't see a ticking time bomb there? I mean, what exactly do you consider to be "the bottom"? Beacuse the bottom, or the ones who you think should be getting assistance, is soon becoming the majority as definted by this administration. The idea of giving has never been horrible... this nation gives more to its people by way of individuals than any other country, as well as to other nations... and even that will dry up more thanks to Obama's cutting of the taxability of charitable donations.
| quote: | | That whole paragraph is absolutely sickening and that viewpoint is EVERYTHING that is wrong in this country. It is the reason why more people aren't happy. It is manufactured class struggle, fear mongering at its absolute best. |
This statement is 100% true, except the reason for it is not Rush... it is the Democrats that manufacture class struggle, class envy, class politics, etc. Everything is a crisis. Identity politics is not a Republican idea. Class warfare is not a Conservative principle... in Conservatism, the individual's potential is allowed to flourish regardless of socioeconomic status, what color they are, what city they were born, and whether they have a penis or a vagina.
The one piece of that rant that nobody is answering is this, which you can't tell me dosn't hold water:
| quote: | How many Democrat Party constituencies already live barely above the poverty line; have lived there all their lives; and are still, after 20 or 30 years, waiting for the Democrats to make things better; and their lives are not better; and they still vote Democrat?.....
It used to be that people in that circumstance would aspire to be [one of the successful] and would have sympathy for what's happening 'cause they wouldn't want it to happen to them when they [reach success]. |
IMO, it's all about control. Politicians have limited power to a degree, and have little control over individuals who prosper when Capitalism is running full steam. But socialism... when you remove revanue and control the system, you can control the people easier and have more power. Each successive administration seems to want more and more control. What is happening now is so far away from what the founders of this country indended this republic to look like. |
|
|
| Danny Ocean |
| quote: | Originally posted by BARS-N-STARS
Coming from someone who lives in LA and is flying a French flag now theres a combination! :haha: Holy. |
big time bandwagoner since ever. |
|
|
| Clovis |
| quote: | Originally posted by Nostalgic
I'M POOR, I'M ON WELFARE, I HAVE NO JOB, I'M A CRACKHEAD, GIMME FREE MONEY GIMME GIMME GIMME! |
Nostalgic has now been successfully added to your ignore list. You will now be returned to where you were. |
|
|
| Clovis |
| quote: | Originally posted by BARS-N-STARS
Coming from someone who lives in LA and is flying a French flag now theres a combination! :haha: Holy. |
So what? |
|
|
| starboy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Clovis
The thing is, it isn't just a difference of opinion. I disagree with plenty of people that I don't mind, such as yourself.
The ideology, viewpoint, and perspective that Rush espouses is incongruent with reality, largely made up, and morally flawed. It is harmful. It breeds hate and disagreement where there shouldn't be any.
Everything in that paragraph you posted is a lie. It is simply not true. There's no nation of people sitting on their ing butts enjoying a steady diet of government cheese and jumping for joy at the stimulus package and Obama's plans. Thats just ing horse , and frankly, an insult to the thousands of hard working people in this country facing some of the toughest times of their lives and just trying to get by and move ahead, who need every bit of help they can get.
Being on unemployment is not ing fun. Unemployment doesn't ing pay rent for most people. It doesn't give folks a comfortable free ride. Not having health care isn't a joy filled affair either.
And so people who live very comfortably are being asked to give a tiny bit more to help the greater good of the entire country, of the people who are struggling on the bottom. When in s name did this idea become so vilified and horrible? There isn't some ing giant middle class content on not making much money and looking to tax rebates for their big break.
That whole paragraph is absolutely sickening and that viewpoint is EVERYTHING that is wrong in this country. It is the reason why more people aren't happy. It is manufactured class struggle, fear mongering at its absolute best. |
Very well said, man. You are rigt on all accounts. Rush Limbaugh and his pathetic following of miserable sheeple. |
|
|
| Clovis |
| quote: | Originally posted by The17sss
This is exactly how I feel but in the opposite direction... the class envy fostered by the democrats is what espouses hate. The group politics of labeling people as this or that, and pitting them against each other is what breeds hate. Capitalism does not identify skin color or race or gender, and allows anyone to succeed to whatever degree they choose. |
Capitalism is not racist. People in this country still are though. That is a completely different debate.
There is no class warfare being bred by democrats. Thats another lie that is completely made up. Democrats want greater equality. They want the ridiculously huge income disparity that has been skyrocketing to be reduced. They want ALL of America to prosper and not just a select few. They want to give all Americans the means and tools to find that prosperity.
| quote: |
Nobody is saying they enjoy living that life... cleary they don't because they are perpetually unhappy. It is absolutely not an insult to those who bust their ass and work in the hopes of giving their kids and themselves a better life. The point being made is that it is easier to take a handout if its there than to work hard to achieve. Just like it's easier to beat a child than to raise it. It creats a culture of dependency that just begets more and more of the same. And it's true that some people, even if it won't change their life for the better, get excited when they see people at the top cut down to size. |
It is NOT ing easier to take a handout. BOTH are difficult. Unemployment does not create dependancy except for in a minority of cases. There are always some people who will abuse the system and are content barely getting by with free money. They are not the majority. They are not the people for whom the tax rebates and stimulus unemployment benefit increases will make the most difference. As for the people at the top cut down to size, no one is being cut down to size. Half people's salary is not going to be taken away from them and given by the pound to people who aren't working. Thats just NOT what anyone is proposing. What IS being proposed, is a return to the late 90's Clinton era tax system. A small percent increase on people making over 250,000 a year and higher. Which is personal income, not business income.
| quote: |
The ever expanding welfare state we are seeing now strips away incentive... hell, people are afraid to make more than $250K now, including small businesses which I shall attest to is NOT wealthy if you own and operate a small business. Reliance on government assistance is what kills the entrepreneurial spirit, and leads to the misery of living on government handouts. What is truly sickening is seeing how much more people think they are entitled to each day... be it from the government or from those who work hard to be at the top of their profession. Where is the personal responsibility anymore? People can't afford a house, it... give them a mortgage. People can't pay that mortgate? it, they have "a right to have a house" so we'll just punish those who play by the rules to hook up the irresponsible. |
More made up . Look at real life. Look at actual people in these situations. Being on unemployment does not remove the incentive to get a job and make more money. Obviously you've never known anyone on unemployment. It doesn't pay rent. It barely buys food and gas in this economy. I personally would love to make over 250k a year and see my taxes go up sightly. Because I'd still be making enough money to live comfortably in Los Angeles with a nice house and nice car. People are afraid to make over 250,000 dollars? Who are these people? Are they turning down raises and pay increases at work? Are they quitting their job as an attorney and applying at wall-mart so they can get a little 500$ tax break? Again. Look at reality. It tells a far different story, though I know Rush wouldn't have any of it because his fantasy world is so much more fun AND makes him more money.
Who is getting a free mortgage? Who is getting a free house? :conf:
| quote: |
But that's not the case anymore man. A little bit more? A miniscule 2% of the people who file tax returns are paying 62% of ALL INCOME TAXES... what do you consider enough? About 40% of the working popluation do not even pay taxes. You don't see a ticking time bomb there? I mean, what exactly do you consider to be "the bottom"? Beacuse the bottom, or the ones who you think should be getting assistance, is soon becoming the majority as definted by this administration. The idea of giving has never been horrible... this nation gives more to its people by way of individuals than any other country, as well as to other nations... and even that will dry up more thanks to Obama's cutting of the taxability of charitable donations. |
I am mad at the way his new tax plan works vis a vis charitable donations. But we are not givers. In the past 10 years wages have gone down. They have not kept up with inflation. The top 2% of people who pay that 62% have seen their wages skyrocket.
http://money.cnn.com/2008/04/09/new...megap/index.htm
^^ THIS is why Obama and the rest of the democrats want to do what they are doing. Because for too long the people in the middle and at the bottom have gotten the short end of the stick. They often work just as hard, just as long but their wages have fallen or remained stagnant. We still need custodians, drive-thru operators, baggage handlers, nurses and the like, they can't all just turn into investment bankers tomorrow like Rush would suppose they do. And those people would like to see some help. They'd like to see a tiny bit less inequality, and a better chance to move up.
You're god damn right people who earn in the top 2% should pay the majority of the taxes. They're raking in the majority of the wealth. People who barely make enough money to get by, people who are smack in the middle class, should not have to pay as big a share as those who take in 500,000 a year. I agree with this unequivocally. When more people in this country have a solid economic foothold, when more people are on their feet financially, I think it's obvious that the whole country prospers. We've had 8 years of squeezing the middle class and giving tax breaks to people making good money. We've heard over and over that this way spurs investment to keep the economy going. We've had 8 years of reducing the "welfare state" and making people more "independent" and giving them "incentive" to go succeed and prosper on their own. And where are we today?
| quote: |
This statement is 100% true, except the reason for it is not Rush... it is the Democrats that manufacture class struggle, class envy, class politics, etc. Everything is a crisis. Identity politics is not a Republican idea. Class warfare is not a Conservative principle... in Conservatism, the individual's potential is allowed to flourish regardless of socioeconomic status, what color they are, what city they were born, and whether they have a penis or a vagina. |
Yeah, conservatism is the first thing that comes to mind when I think civil rights movement, equal pay laws, anti-discrimination laws and the like. Absolutely. You guys are real champions in that area. in hell. :stongue: :stongue:
| quote: |
The one piece of that rant that nobody is answering is this, which you can't tell me dosn't hold water:
IMO, it's all about control. Politicians have limited power to a degree, and have little control over individuals who prosper when Capitalism is running full steam. But socialism... when you remove revanue and control the system, you can control the people easier and have more power. Each successive administration seems to want more and more control. What is happening now is so far away from what the founders of this country indended this republic to look like. |
Yeah tell me how it used to be Rush. Like, last year? Like, when we had the Bush tax cuts?
And when people were all running to get into that top 2% income bracket? Jesus. His ideas are so far out of touch it is INSANITY. He makes so much money that he has no ing idea how regular peoples lives go.
For the 8 millionth time. I don't know where you learned about socialism, but everything I know about it says that Obama and his policies are not socialist. They borrow certain socialist ideas in passing, but any actual SOCIALIST will tell you that this is a far cry from what socialism intends. This isn't redistribution of revenue. This is increased taxation to increase equality and ensure greater equal opportunity within the capitalist system. Capitalism on its own will leave lots of people in the dust and a few others make a lot of money. But we depend on each other's success, within the capitalist system in order to make money. If regular middle class folks have no purchasing power because their wages haven't gone up with inflation and their mortgage premiums have doubled, they can't buy things from big companies and make CEO's rich. It isn't rocket science.
More control? Control people to do what? Not be completely poor? :stongue: |
|
|
| infinity HiGH |
| quote: | Originally posted by Clovis
So what? |
It's clearly a knock on your cred.
:rolleyes: |
|
|
| Clovis |
| quote: | Originally posted by infinity HiGH
It's clearly a knock on your cred.
:rolleyes: |
lol
Sick burn! |
|
|
| The17sss |
Edit: Fixed (had a problem with the quote boxes)
| quote: | Originally posted by Clovis
There is no class warfare being bred by democrats. Thats another lie that is completely made up. Democrats want greater equality. They want the ridiculously huge income disparity that has been skyrocketing to be reduced. They want ALL of America to prosper and not just a select few. They want to give all Americans the means and tools to find that prosperity. |
This is the myth that so many people have been lead to believe. We're just gonna have to agree to disagree on this.
| quote: | | Being on unemployment does not remove the incentive to get a job and make more money. Obviously you've never known anyone on unemployment. It doesn't pay rent. It barely buys food and gas in this economy. |
Not for everyone, but for those who born into the culture of living off of government handouts, it sure does remove the incentive... especially for those who lack education (and I'm sure you realize the dog that our public school systems produce). Why work when you can get a check in the mail? If you were born into it, and grew up in it, and it's normal for you, it's easy to keep living the status quo. There are wonderful examples of those who break free, but a lot more who don't.
My mom's sister Linda is a welfare case, which is odd becaue she was brought up in a good family. My mom and her other sister are very successful. But Linda got on welfare in her 20's and has never got out of it... she's attempted to get a few jobs here and there, but with her lack of education she figured it would be easier to just take the check for say, $400 a week than work for the same amount. Her daughter was born into that lifestyle, and started ting out kids at 16... she now has 3 from 2 different guys and refuses to get married to her now longtime boyfriend because it would reduce her free welfare money she gets each month. Whem my grandmother died and the grandkids split up the inheritance, she went strait to the dealer and bought a Lexus. Now she drives around in a Lexus, doesn't work, gets enough cheddar to pay the bills each month, and has no incentive to get a job... I mean, why would she? Her kids will continue the cycle I'm sure.
| quote: | | Who is getting a free mortgage? Who is getting a free house? :conf: |
Not "free", but you know what I mean... look at this:
| quote: | SEC. 7001. MANDATORY LOAN MODIFICATIONS.
Section 109(a) of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (12 U.S.C. 5219) is amended— (1) by striking the last sentence; (2) by striking ‘‘To the extent’’ and inserting the following:
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—To the extent’’; and (3) by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(2) LOAN MODIFICATIONS REQUIRED.— ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—In addition to actions required under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall, not later than 15 days after the date of enactment of this paragraph, develop and implement a plan to facilitate loan modifications to prevent avoidable mortgage loan foreclosures.
‘‘(B) FUNDING.—Of amounts made available under section 115 and not otherwise obligated, not less than $50,000,000,000, shall be made available to the Secretary for purposes of carrying out the mortgage loan modification plan required to be developed and implemented under this paragraph.
‘‘(C) CRITERIA.—The loan modification plan required by this paragraph may incorporate the use of— 768
‘‘(i) loan guarantees and credit enhancements;
‘‘(ii) the reduction of loan principal amounts and interest rates;
‘‘(iii) extension of mortgage loan terms; and
‘‘(iv) any other similar mechanisms or combinations thereof, as determined appropriate by the Secretary. |
Yes, you're reading correctly- $50 billion more of our tax dollars made available to Tim Geithner to force banks to do loan modifications with homeowners deep under water on their mortgages. That's in addition to the $20 billion already allocated by the House last month for the same purposes. The Democrats want to accelerate the pace and use the power of government to essentially provide a blanket amnesty for borrowers and lenders who made bad financial decisions... how else would you explain that?
| quote: | I am mad at the way his new tax plan works vis a vis charitable donations. But we are not givers. In the past 10 years wages have gone down. They have not kept up with inflation. The top 2% of people who pay that 62% have seen their wages skyrocket.
http://money.cnn.com/2008/04/09/new...megap/index.htm
^^ THIS is why Obama and the rest of the democrats want to do what they are doing. Because for too long the people in the middle and at the bottom have gotten the short end of the stick. They often work just as hard, just as long but their wages have fallen or remained stagnant. We still need custodians, drive-thru operators, baggage handlers, nurses and the like, they can't all just turn into investment bankers tomorrow like Rush would suppose they do. And those people would like to see some help. They'd like to see a tiny bit less inequality, and a better chance to move up.
You're god damn right people who earn in the top 2% should pay the majority of the taxes. They're raking in the majority of the wealth. People who barely make enough money to get by, people who are smack in the middle class, should not have to pay as big a share as those who take in 500,000 a year. I agree with this unequivocally. |
Look at this 3rd paragraph man... you are full of resentful class envy and don't even realize it. Do you have any earthly idea how difficult it is to make it to the point where you can earn $500K a year? A lot of those people toiled in the classroom, the universities, and in the business world to be in that position. The top 2% DO pay the majority of the taxes... but when does it become too much of a majority in your eyes?
Nobody is suggesting that everyone should become a hedge fund manager. And if janitors don't like being janitors, they have the choice to work to find a better paying profession. It isn't about the top 2% seeing their wages skyrocket... it's the fact that the ratio keeps growing. Look at this table man... as the years go by, the top earners pay a successively higher ratio of the overal taxes.
Besides, what's wrong with wages skyrocketing? Everyone has the opportunity, or at least they did before Obama, to put in the effort to see their wages skyrocket if they chose.
Your statements in the paragraphs quoted above buys right into the fallacy of "positive rights"
| quote: | Charity is taking from what you have rightfully earned and giving it to those in need. It is considered to be a noble or selfless act done out of concern for others. An act of charity is worthy of commendation. However, in a “positive rights” framework there is no such thing as charity.
If a person has an irrefutable right to something from you, then it is by no means a noble act to give it to them. Think of it this way: Are we grateful when our right to free speech is not violated? Do we thank the government when it doesn’t impose restrictions on our right to freely exercise our chosen faiths? Do we pat others on the back for not murdering us?
Of course not. We fully and rightfully expect these things to be done because they are appropriate. In fact, the violation of these rights is just cause for anger, protest, and in extreme cases revolution. For this reason it is simply absurd to extend right-hood to positive rights.
But this isn’t a call to end all social welfare programs. In fact, it’s quite the opposite. This is a call for the proper approach to government assistance. Instead of the absurd positive rights approach, we need one of responsibility. I shouldn’t get food or shelter from others because I have a right to them, but rather because it’s the responsible thing for them to do. The government shouldn’t give me welfare or food stamps because I have a right to them, but rather because it is irresponsible for a government to let its citizens starve or go homeless.
But if the outcome is the same in the two approaches, then what’s the point in making a distinction anyway? Well, besides the fact that you always want to carry a correct political and philosophical outlook, the outcome really isn’t the same. Yes, those who buy into the fallacy of positive rights and those who don’t want to help those unable to help themselves. However, those who reject positive rights are looking for the best and most practical way to provide assistance. |
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/the-fa...ositive-rights/
| quote: | | Yeah, conservatism is the first thing that comes to mind when I think civil rights movement, equal pay laws, anti-discrimination laws and the like. Absolutely. You guys are real champions in that area. in hell. :stongue: :stongue: |
Don't confuse "Conservatism" for "Republicans"... Conservatism is a principal, not a party; they are not synonyms. And, must I always remind Democrats that there were more of them that voted against the civil rights bill than republicans? ... Robert Byrd is still in the senate and is a former Klansman for god's sake!
| quote: | | For the 8 millionth time. I don't know where you learned about socialism, but everything I know about it says that Obama and his policies are not socialist. They borrow certain socialist ideas in passing, but any actual SOCIALIST will tell you that this is a far cry from what socialism intends. |
It's creeping socialism... in small doses until when it becomes the reality, we don't even know what hit us.
| quote: | | This isn't redistribution of revenue. This is increased taxation to increase equality and ensure greater equal opportunity within the capitalist system. |
Dude, what you just mentioned is exactly redistribution. That is what's happening. Taking more and more from the top to expand entitelements to the bottom is redistribution.
| quote: | | Capitalism on its own will leave lots of people in the dust and a few others make a lot of money. But we depend on each other's success, within the capitalist system in order to make money. If regular middle class folks have no purchasing power because their wages haven't gone up with inflation and their mortgage premiums have doubled, they can't buy things from big companies and make CEO's rich. It isn't rocket science. |
You can look to Carter, Clinton, Barney Frank, Maxiene Waters, Chriss Dodd, Franklin Raines, and our friends in ACORN for forcing such horrible lending practices of Fannie and Freddie that lead to this. I've posted plenty of sources before, even one showing the 17 times Bush tried to reign them in only to get rejected by the names listed above. Check this article out from 1999 in the NYT, before Bush was even president, predicting what Clinton's tactics would lead to: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpa...75AC0A96F958260
Pretty damning article, huh?
I'll leave you with this... from Alexis de Tocqueville's book "Democracy In America". The guy died 150 years ago and he could predict what we're seeing now. He warns that the passion for equality will give rise to a certain kind of degradation in which citizens will surrender their freedom democratically to a tutelary, protective, nanny state-like power.
| quote: | | "Above these citizens an immense tutelary power is elevated, which alone takes charge of assuring their enjoyments and watching over their fate. It is absolute, detailed, far-seeing, and mild. It would resemble paternal power if, like that, it had for its object to prepare men for manhood; but on the contrary, it seeks only to keep them fixed irrevocably in childhood; it likes citizens to enjoy themselves provided that they think only of enjoying themselves. It willingly works for their happiness; but it wants to be the unique agent and sole arbiter of that; it provides for their security, foresees and secures their needs, facilitates their pleasures, conducts their principal affairs, directs their industry, regulates their estates, divides their inheritances; can it not take away from them entirely the trouble of thinking and the pain of living? Subjection in small affairs manifests itself every day and makes itself felt without distinction by all citizens. It does not make them desperate, but it constantly thwarts them and brings them to renounce the use of their wills. Thus little by little, it extinguishes their spirits and enervates their souls." |
I mean, ... this is exactly what's happening man.
p.s. cheers to our first long debate without verbally abusing each other ;) |
|
|
| Clovis |
I can't do this.
I can't sit here and try to explain such complex issues on the internet. I'll try but it really is like banging my head against a wall.
Your mom's sister is not an example of the majority, and I'm sure she can afford some fantastic housing and a great lifestyle with that money. :rolleyes:
Janitors can find another job. But we still need janitors. They should still get help. They should still not have to pay as much taxes as someone who makes 500k a year.
I absolutely know how hard it is to make 500k a year, I know several people who have gotten to that point on their own merits. But I also know that they can easily afford a small increase in their taxes. EASILY. This economy is not as hard on them. They aren't in danger of losing their homes. They aren't wondering how they're going to put food on the table and pay for their kids college. They have money saved. They have money in the bank. A lot of them have been abe to live off their investments and no longer work. I'm not resentful of people who make a lot of money. I think being successful is fantastic. But I understand that they can afford to pay more taxes. Their quality of life is not going to plummet because of a 4.4% increase in order to give the middle and lower class some breathing room.
| quote: | | Besides, what's wrong with wages skyrocketing? Everyone has the opportunity, or at least they did before Obama, to put in the effort to see their wages skyrocket if they chose. |
No they ing DONT. If you've been with a company for 5-10-15 years and your wages are stagnant and barely moving, if you get a small promotion but the pay increase is meager because the company is restructuring due to the downturn...the list goes on...I could list you thousands of examples in which the upward mobility is very difficult and comes at great risk.
I'm ending here because there's no use trying to persuade someone neck deep in republican kool-aid. From the terms you use to the fallacies you espouse with the help of Rush. It is conditioning. You've been fed this for so long that you can't fathom it not being true even in the face of so much evidence out there in the real world. The evidence that lies in ACTUAL people who live in this country. ACTUAL problems families are facing. ACTUAL inequalities that exist in the working world.
I came to my conclusions over the past 5 years of observing society, of living in other countries where the tax rates are far higher, and, surprise, the sky isn't falling and there are still wealthy people and the incentive to make more money is still there, and where there is a far more decent social safety net than we have in America.
We are going to have to agree to disagree, but I thank ing GOD that for once this country has leadership and a government that is pushing in the right direction, government that is concerned with the plight of all its people and not just a few, government that can and will step in to help more people prosper and lead happier lives.
You have Bobby Jindal screaming that government is terrible, because thats the ONLY ing slight you guys have against what is going on. "Government CANT help people, because it's the devil!" Thats funny Bobby, aren't you a governor?
I don't want a socialist state. I don't want communist redistribution. I don't want a nation of dependents where welfare pays all the bills and then some. I want capitalism with checks. I want capitalism that doesn't leave huge swaths of the populace in the dust, busting their asses at tough jobs for weak pay while CEO's ok themselves another 8 million dollar compensation package. I want fairness. Institutionalized fairness. I want good education for EVERYONE, not "NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND". That is what I see in these proposals, and that is what I want, and I think that when we are done here and more people are leading better lives the nation as a whole will be far more prosperous. |
|
|
| The17sss |
| quote: | Originally posted by Clovis
I'm ending here because there's no use trying to persuade someone neck deep in republican kool-aid. From the terms you use to the fallacies you espouse with the help of Rush. It is conditioning. You've been fed this for so long that you can't fathom it not being true even in the face of so much evidence out there in the real world. The evidence that lies in ACTUAL people who live in this country. ACTUAL problems families are facing. ACTUAL inequalities that exist in the working world.
I came to my conclusions over the past 5 years of observing society, of living in other countries where the tax rates are far higher, and, surprise, the sky isn't falling and there are still wealthy people and the incentive to make more money is still there, and where there is a far more decent social safety net than we have in America.
We are going to have to agree to disagree, but I thank ing GOD that for once this country has leadership and a government that is pushing in the right direction, government that is concerned with the plight of all its people and not just a few, government that can and will step in to help more people prosper and lead happier lives. |
It's hard to discuss this with you too from my perspective because, you seem like such a reasonable person. The things you are saying above, I can agree with even with a heavy conservative belief system. You seem to think an expanding role by government and consequently, an expanding government is the answer to the country's ills, and I think that the above points you've made can be done by the opposite- government getting out of the peoples' way. I don't like people who have no education in finance telling the banks and the mortgage industry what to do, I don't like when government thinks they can run anything better than the private sector, and I don't like people who have never run a business telling other people how they should run their business (and this does not mean I am against regulation at all).
I know you find this hard to believe, but I truly have my set of beliefs not because I've been conditioned, but because I too have studied both sides and proactively sought to understand how one ideology works vs. the other... and I make an informed decision based on everything I read and experience. I don't live in some bubble man, I also talk to real people every day in and out of the business world, on all socioeconomic levels. I haven't lived in another country, but if you're talking about Europe or Canada, sure it doesn't suck to live there I would bet, but they (Europe) have had higher unemployment, decreasing production, and wage stagnation for years. Canada has universal health care... great. But there are still more MRI machines in Pittsburgh than in Canada, and they pay 10-12% more in income taxes I believe; there's no such thing as a free lunch anywhere. If that's the model you're comfortable with, then fine. You've chosen to go the other route than I would, but that's cool... this country would be stupid if everyone thought the same way. |
|
|
| Clovis |
I don't think that taxes are the devil. I like taxes. I like paying taxes to fund the greater good of my country. I think that a tax system in which we have a small amount of redistribution for the greater good while keeping a capitalist model for enterprise and the economy is good.
Basically I think there is a middle ground between the failures of both socialism and capitalism in which we can get more people to be prosperous and have greater opportunities for everyone.
At this point the Republican party and conservative ideology have gone gung ho against that sort of idea. I don't think the answer is to swing completely in the other direction, but I believe that most of what Obama et al are proposing is what have been hoping for for many years. Poor people deserve a break. Hard working people in the middle class who are scraping by deserve a break. They don't deserve to be dependent. They deserve a break. And I think thats what they're going to get here. |
|
|
|
|
