9/11.Quote:
Originally Posted by vashti [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
__________
Printable View
9/11.Quote:
Originally Posted by vashti [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
__________
Nope. This started before 9/11. How else did George get into office? Did anyone really not know he was a nut before they elected him?
I'm not a fan of Obama at all, he claims we need change, sure we need some to an extent but I feel it may be too radical and bordering a socialist mentallity...although Palin is as dumb as a rock. I voted McCain.
I personally think I should have voted for Obama because there's a high chance that guy is going to be assasinated. Then Biden would be in office. I would have voted Biden if he were running for president.
From what I read Obama is actually not as socialist as McCain ads would like people to believe. His strategies are a lot closer to Bill Clinton's centrist ideologies than socialist ones.Quote:
Originally Posted by 1averagejoe [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
The real radical is McCain. He is the one who will give more of Bush. More economic problems, more US debt, more corruption, more US isolation from the rest of the world, more problems in the middle east (I don't for a second believe that "Bomb bomb bomb Iran" was a joke).
I'd rather pay taxes and live pretty well rather than pursue excessive wealth and be at risk of being ****ed up whenever something bad happens.
It's a democratic government. Dems are running the House. Needless to say, Nancy Pelosi is a stupid ****ing cunt. Everybody tries to blame the economy on the Conservatives or the Libs, but the economy is shit because broke-ass idiots bought houses they couldn't afford.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frasbee [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
"Redistributing the wealth" is an inherent socialist ideology.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mishanya [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
To all those that voted for McCain, thank you. I wish I could vote.
Personally, McCain wouldn't be my choice either. I wanted Ron Paul.
Final note: Sarah Palin is a complete idiot. In my opinion, McCain should've picked Lieberman.
/rant
Everyone pays taxes for govermnet services. If that's classified as "redistribution of wealth" then every single government on earth (including Republicans) is socialist.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGreek [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
I said it years ago and I will say it again: democracy should allow ppl to rank (say, from 1 - 10) how you want your tax dollars to be distributed. This should be part of your annual tax return, just like your tick box for supporting a political party. And those #s should be readily published and available, just like census #s.
If 80% of the population wants a kick ass military or education or socialized medicine, well, the ppl have spoken.
If that bites, then you are looking at a different system of voting, something like a weighted meritocracy, where those w/more 'qualifications' (to be determined) would be allowed more votes.
Because, really, don't you think your vote is worth more than an uneducated 18 year old, or a felon?
Well, does it boil down to whether people vote for what benefits them the most or what they think would be the best for the people in the country as a whole?
Or maybe that's essentially what is achieved when everyone votes for what's best for themselves and then the greater representations of the population has the best shot at getting a favourable poll result. Until all the intricacies of politics screws it up, that is.
You know the other thing I don't understand in this coming US election is people's defiance to "bigger government". Bigger, massive government, when you hear it sounds like a horde of dictators and beauracrats are coming after your money, oh nooo, hide it under your bed!!!
I'm surprised that many people don't see what a "bigger" and "smaller" government means. It means government spending on infrastructure which supports everyone. Roads, collapsing bridges, pipes underneath your city, railways, schools, hospitals, fire departments, police these are all part of government. What does smaller government means? It means cut backs on all of the above. It means road disrepair, bursting pipes, starving of hospitals, fire departments, police of staff and funds they desperately need. People don't see a lot of that in the one line "massive government adlibs", but if you ask me that's a big thing to gamble away just to save a few bucks. The price is the quality of life you will be living.
You're right up to a certain point Mish. Once welfare programs kick in then the quality of MY life goes nowhere. Instead someone else is benefited at MY expense
The main reason I strongly dislike Obamas plans for income redistribution. The income is to be redistributed to welfare programs. Fucck that
Yeah, it's far more productive to aim for a surplus and then spend in on a military campaign. [/sarcasm]
Keep on crying a river for the chance to just make 200k instead of 300k. It has to be so difficult to live without a top-notch computing rig.
Persuasion is an art. Isn’t it amazing? It can distract the intellect from reasoning. :evil:
Why the fucck did you put that there? This has nothing to do with what we are discussing. Spending money rebuilding Iraq is a waste that I don't want to see, but that is 1) a topic for another day and 2) not income redistribution. You just went on a BUNNY TRAILQuote:
Originally Posted by Lipp [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
As to income: If I wanted to make $200k per year I would pursue a career that took less work. But since I'm willing to put forth MORE work to MAKE more, that money should stay in MY fuccking pocket
Its an example of other ways to spend tax dollars instead of welfare programs that you hate so much. Sounds is if you have a preference of that it should all go to something that just benefits you, and not what benefits a lot of others.Quote:
Originally Posted by DoesntMatter [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
The thing is, if you already make $250k a year you're settled and still wont get taxed as much, and if you want to make money beyond that you're aiming for living beyond a "good" standard of living and don't need help from government programs since you're already doing well, but if you want to live in excess there's a price to pay for it, and I'd much rather see a government that collects taxes and uses it to boost those who have it worst and provide it with the same chance to succeed that you've got, rather than promote you to hoard the cash while people continue to live in the gutter.Quote:
As to income: If I wanted to make $200k per year I would pursue a career that took less work. But since I'm willing to put forth MORE work to MAKE more, that money should stay in MY fuccking pocket
1) I'm not interested in something that benefits "just me." Maintaing roads and school districts benefits EVERYONE. THAT is what I want. NOT things that benefit JUST you or JUST me
2) In the long run high income taxes hurt everyone. Do you think people starting their own businesses would work so hard to make it successful if they weren't going to get paid a lot at the end? If you curb their potential earnings so much they won't be motivated. These people are NEEDED because they make the economy grow and THEIR MOTIVATION gives way to NEW JOBS
I don't think it's bad to help welfare programs if your income can support it. I think it would look good for us to help out as many people as possible on a global scale and I don't think it would hurt our image to other countries. Why do I care? Because I think there's more to this country than just "making it" financially. I see poorer countries being much happier overall and that's all I could hope for. It'd be nice if people came to this country to embrace it rather than exploit it.
Does this fit in with the topic? I don't know. Something popped in my head at this moment. I voted though. I voted for Obama and I felt it better to vote for someone who had a chance of winning than having my vote be meaningless in the end.
btw ... DM, that Mike Tyson quote is hilarious (it IS Tyson, right?)
Yeah it is. I love Mike Tyson quotes. So many people think he is stupid but he isn't. He's actually such a straight-shooter than people overlook what he says. As in he is not affected by social nuances and doesn't understand them, so he says things exactly how they areQuote:
Originally Posted by tooxshort [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
You're in California right? I'm in NY, where Obama has the second largest lead over McCain than in any other state. My vote was meaningless too. At least I might have been able to keep some Democrats out of the state governmentQuote:
Originally Posted by tooxshort [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
We wouldn't need welfare programs if there was a common national attitude and culture with appropriate values. People don't want to work for their money. People have horrible spending habits. People think fast food is to be taken for granted and don't think eating out twice a week is going to run deeply in your paycheck. Too many kids today aren't getting support from their parents and are being raised in daycare centers where they learn to become inconsiderate selfish little fucckersQuote:
Originally Posted by tooxshort [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
There are a lot of problems and the root is largely social, but nothing money will fix. All a high school needs for a good education is money for text books and a chalkboard and chalk and teachers. That is it
I've got to agree with you there...Quote:
Originally Posted by DoesntMatter [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
You know this is one of the other things that I don't understand DM. I know that you consider yourself to be a good Christian. You always defend your Religion from attacks, which is good from my point of view. But charity is considered one of the seven pillars of Christianity and kindness and generosity are two of the seven virtues. In the New Testament Jesus goes out of his way to help out the poor, he teaches to help the poor with everything one has. There are various passages in the New Testament that hint the doors to heaven will be closed to those who aren't charitable. This is what I don't understand, you are a Christian and yet you appear to be so closed to any welfare program designed to help out the poor for just a small fraction of the tax money. How can you be a Christian and at the same time be so opposed to a charity program? The way I see it these are the opposite points of view.Quote:
Originally Posted by DoesntMatter [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
Holy shit. I am genuinely shocked that someone on this site even KNOWS that the New Testament exists
Anyways I've said it plenty of times, I'm not a good Christian at all. However, I DO defend it from people saying it's BAD, because THAT is a HUGE crock of bullshit from hate-mongering pseudo-intellectuals. There is no hypocrisy there
But as to charity organizations, food and shelter should be the only constitutes of that. Everything above and beyond a persons food and shelter should be earned by the individual
So when you consider that there are very few Americans in dire need of food, you wonder why how much it should cost to fund these charities. It should be very little
Huh, this is topical. I was just talking to an aboriginal psychologist last week. She was telling me that the welfare system is absolutely destroying ppls work ethic. The problem, as she describes it, is that many starting wage jobs do not pay high enough (or as well as welfare) to cover the bills. Why work your ass off for less than you can get popping babies & sitting at home?
We discussed whether it isn't better to cut welfare & use that money to supplement low-wage jobs. This kind of system exists for students working summer jobs, so why not for low-income ppl? This way, work ethic is more directly tied to wages.
BTW, it is my impression that Senator Obama is very open to new ideas and ways of doing things. I think, in this way, he might be one of the most accessible presidents you'll ever know. So why don't you simply send him your ideas about how to *improve* things, DM? Instead of just bitching about the status quo. :P
What about learning programs? Teaching the poor how to make life better for themselves? You mention shelter, but is it actually provided to the poor for free? (A genuine question, I don't know) What about work programs designed to put the poor back into the workforce?Quote:
Originally Posted by DoesntMatter [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
I think once you start breaking down existing welfare programs (or additions that could make existing programs better) you will find there are a lot of components to them.
That's the main reason why I voted for Obama. I get that same impression of him.Quote:
Originally Posted by IndiReloaded [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
Why should it be?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mishanya [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
I don't favor giving anything to anyone for free unless they are under 18, severely mentally ill, or senile.
Vash, I said it due to DM's earlier postQuote:
Originally Posted by vashti [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
Please read it in that contextQuote:
Originally Posted by DoesntMatter [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
I don't really have a problem with that particular aspect of DM's post.
medicaid and social security make up the majority of "welfare" benefits.
I fuccking HATE social security. Getting rid of that would be fantastic
you say that because you're a teenager.
No, I say that because I can manage my own money and savings better than the government can. I don't need or want the government handling my money like I'm a fuccking 5 year old
Social security is just another method of income redistribution. People who worked and made their own money paying for the retirement of those who didn't save. FUCCCKKKKKK THHAAAATTTTTTTTTTTT
You should work for Los Angeles County. They did away with social security withholdings years ago.
actually you and your friends are paying for people to have social security right now.Quote:
Originally Posted by DoesntMatter [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
i understand where you're coming from, but we need welfare to keep our economy moving. yes there are people who mooch but there are people who need it. plus there are people going hungry in the u.s. maybe not your part, but come to where i live and i'll take you to places that look like poor parts of mexico.
also some people simply cannot afford to save for retirement and our spending their money on survival right now.
See, this is what I don't understand. Where this lack of charity comes from. How can you call yourself Christian and at the same time be so against helping the poor (almost the entire premise of Christianity)? This double standard blows my mind.Quote:
Originally Posted by DoesntMatter [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
Do you ever ask yourself, what would Jesus do?
Mish he's made it pretty clear he doesn't consider himself a Christian.
That's what I want to hear from him CB. In the past he made it pretty clear that he is a Christian and that's one of the reasons why he is so anti left, because (allegedly) the left attacks his Religion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Boy II [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
It's not a double standard at all you moron. You're having a lot of trouble understanding how it isn't so I'll be more explicit explaining it to youQuote:
Originally Posted by Mishanya [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
I don't need to act as a Christian to know that the principles of Christianity are good. I can see that what Christianity stands for are good principles, but I don't have to be a Christian myself to see that
Understand?
So when I see people attacking it, I become completely pissed off because I see that they are being unfair and hateful to something good
And I am, just for the record, Christian
Social security is messed up because it is giving money to people who were dumb as spend it on stupid things and didn't save and work hard when they were younger. The same goes for other welfare programs. Almost nobody over the age of 22 in this country that is poor didn't have the opportunity to help themselves
And @ misombra, I don't need to go anywhere outside of Rochester to see what poverty looks like. Instead of giving those people handouts drive them out to a factory or farm for work and teach them good spending habits
old people who are on social security and medicaid?
yeah that'll work. not.
next suggestion please?
Okay to summarizeQuote:
Originally Posted by DoesntMatter [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]
You are a Christian and everyone who is poor is dumb and therefore doesn't need any help.
Is that about right?