Ultimate College Softball
Register Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 1 of 9      1   2   3   4   Next   »
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #1 
Another member posted a 5% unemployment rate under Bush compared to today's rate of 9% and not one Conservative member asked why Bush was brought into the discussion.  I mentioned that the last 13 months under Bush saw job losses while the last 16 months under Obama has seen private sector job growth.  I was called out for bringing Bush into the equation once again.  If you are on the fence about who is the best Party to lead this nation, I hope you hear the doublespeak.

Both Liberal and Conservative economists, Bernanke, Geitner, Ben Stein, David Stockman, and Paul Krugman, to name a few, have said the raising of our debt ceiling is critical.  These folks are often countered by pundits Hannity, Limbaugh, and Congresswoman Bachman, as well as many Republican politicians.  If you are on the fence, I hope you assign the proper weight to all.

If your primary concern is making abortion illegal, I respect your views and can offer little from my Party other than a goal of reducing abortions as much as possible without resorting to a "legal" solution.

If you are on the fence and visit here often, you know I try to make a case for this Administration and Democrats in general.  No more, no less.  My only wish is that you weigh what you read, sift through some of the silliness, and ultimately come up with a decision that is satisfactory to you.
swifty

Registered:
Posts: 941
Reply with quote  #2 
Dewey

The sincerity with which you present the above conclusions is truly commendable. At the same time it is the most arrogant, self-righteous drivel I have ever heard. Do you not think that each one of us believes just as deeply in the statements, ideals and conclusions we post as you do in yours? Yet, you have the arrogance to actually say out loud to everyone reading this forum that everything that you post is the absolute truth and everything that those of us on the right post is nothing more than unjust accusations, distortions and out and out lies.

If you are going to try to tell me that I've taken your post the wrong way, don't bother. This is not the first time you've made the same implication. I think this very thing may shed some light on why many of us give up trying to converse with you. You have absolutely no intention of learning from these discussions. Even when presented with facts, if those facts present this administration or this President in a negative light, you'd never admit it. Instead, you usually just conveneintly don't respond. I believe this is why you've been called disingenuous by a few different posters.

If I made a statement that could be proven incorrect using independent, unbiased facts, I'd be the first to admit my error. It's the only way to have a honest political discussion. If you're going to defend the indefensable just because you don't want to ever admit that your side isn't perfect, then there truly is no point to these discussions other than a way for us to vent our frustrations when we feel no one else is listening.
oldscout

Registered:
Posts: 3,492
Reply with quote  #3 

Quote:
Originally Posted by swifty
Dewey

The sincerity with which you present the above conclusions is truly commendable. At the same time it is the most arrogant, self-righteous drivel I have ever heard. Do you not think that each one of us believes just as deeply in the statements, ideals and conclusions we post as you do in yours? Yet, you have the arrogance to actually say out loud to everyone reading this forum that everything that you post is the absolute truth and everything that those of us on the right post is nothing more than unjust accusations, distortions and out and out lies.

If you are going to try to tell me that I've taken your post the wrong way, don't bother. This is not the first time you've made the same implication. I think this very thing may shed some light on why many of us give up trying to converse with you. You have absolutely no intention of learning from these discussions. Even when presented with facts, if those facts present this administration or this President in a negative light, you'd never admit it. Instead, you usually just conveneintly don't respond. I believe this is why you've been called disingenuous by a few different posters.

If I made a statement that could be proven incorrect using independent, unbiased facts, I'd be the first to admit my error. It's the only way to have a honest political discussion. If you're going to defend the indefensable just because you don't want to ever admit that your side isn't perfect, then there truly is no point to these discussions other than a way for us to vent our frustrations when we feel no one else is listening.
Swifty- Very good. Yet Dewey will more than likely go to his fact that there was no criticism of Bush on the misc forum prior to President Obama's election & thus why should he EVER say the president is wrong.

Dewey is a very astute & bright opponent & IMO, he doesn't answer any of the questions that he knows would cause him to have to be even a little critical of the president.....I guess maybe that's why we have to do it for him.

One thing I do agree with is that these discussions have been reduced to nothing but venting frustrations & I really haven't seen much of a change in any of those posting on misc.
I just walked 3 miles & going to power wash the house & get ready for a trip to Texas....all sound like more fun.
On a exciting note,I am going to tie in a 9u coach pitch tourney,where my 8 year old is going to be a guest player for the team & while she has been a catcher so far,they want her to play SS,now that really has me tense.

__________________
Terry Schneider
" Fear not tomorrow, God is already there ".
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #4 
OK, let's begin the debate.  Dewey you go first.  ......

Thank you very much.  Swifty, you're now up.

"Dewey, you're an arrogant, disingenuous, partisan person..."


Oops, you lose.  At least that's how I remember High School debates.  How about you just make a case for your side and I'll continue to defend this President and Democrats as a whole?  Do you not want anyone to take the side of the left?  While you're at it, use your words and don't try to change others, (some were actually quoting my posts and changing my words yesterday), as the terms "absolute truth" were injected by you and ascribed to me.  Have a good one.  
PatGillickProtege

Registered:
Posts: 4,364
Reply with quote  #5 

I'm feeling Dewey's got a man-crush for Obama is in the same light that Chris Matthews of MSLSD (MSNBC) had the tingly feeling up his leg.  Suggestion here - why doesn't Dewey write the President a letter and offers to go to Obama's All-Star Birthday Party in Chicago on August 3rd and offer a birthday hummer to Obama.  I bet he'd rather you do that to him than his Klingon wife Michelle Mochelle.


__________________
Keep 'em moving Colonel, a man that eloquent has to be saved.
masare

Registered:
Posts: 2,642
Reply with quote  #6 
54% of Americans feel the recession and unemployment rate is due to decisions made by President Bush during his 2 terms in office.  Only 27% think Obama is to blame.

According to a new Quinnipiac poll, 54 percent of those surveyed say Bush is responsible for the "current condition" of the economy, compared to just 27 percent who blame Obama. Among self-described independent voters, a key 2012 voting bloc, the number shifts slightly: 49 percent point the finger at the former GOP president, while 24 percent blame Obama.
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/voters-blame-bush-more-obama-economy-143014602.html

masare

Registered:
Posts: 2,642
Reply with quote  #7 
54% of Americans feel the recession and unemployment rate is due to decisions made by President Bush during his 2 terms in office.  Only 24% think Obama is to blame.

According to a new Quinnipiac poll, 54 percent of those surveyed say Bush is responsible for the "current condition" of the economy, compared to just 27 percent who blame Obama. Among self-described independent voters, a key 2012 voting bloc, the number shifts slightly: 49 percent point the finger at the former GOP president, while 24 percent blame Obama.
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/voters-blame-bush-more-obama-economy-143014602.html

oldscout

Registered:
Posts: 3,492
Reply with quote  #8 
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/taxes/july_2011/55_oppose_tax_hike_in_debt_ceiling_deal
looks like we got some poll watchers. I'll agree with yours,if you agree with mine.
To me the question as usual has nothing to do with whose fault it is,I wouldn't really make that the #1 concern,yet to each his own.

What do we do about the debt? IMO,I'd like to see an outline of each side specific plan put forth.
I will put forth the Republicans as I know it[ I don't claim to be exact]
1. Reduce discretionary spending by $6 trillion over 10 years.
2.Reform Medicare to reduce incentives for fraud,waste & over spending & do this by changing it to a premium support system that uses market forces to provide the guaranteed coverage at a lower cost.
3. Repeal the Obama HC plan
4.Avert the $2 trillion in taxes from the HC plan,from the expiration of Bush tax cuts & from the presidents proposed budget & instead set up tax reform that would eliminate preferences,loopholes & subsidies & then lower tax rates-thus allowing a more efficient tax code to improve & uplift the private economy versus making the federal gov fatter.

There is one as I see it or understand,what is the other sides?

PS/this pretty much is the Ryan plan as I read it. I do think the Republicans will put forth 1 or 2 others in WRITING in short order....would hope that President Obama would do the same?

I keep asking exactly what these $4 trillion in cuts are he keeps saying he is willing to make,but have seen nothing specific? Maybe one of you can direct me as to where I can find these.Hopefully in his words,not something he is rumored to cut by an unidentified source close to the president.

I know he is demanding increased revenue,not even quite sure how he is suggesting that? Tax on over $250..500..$1M..corporate jets???
Please,I'm looking for specifics???

Doesn't he at least owe us the taxpayers a plan or outline?

__________________
Terry Schneider
" Fear not tomorrow, God is already there ".
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #9 
If you're on the fence...

Please don't be fooled by the numbers.  If you earn $40,000 a year and spend $10,000 yearly to feed your family, then 25% of your income is spent on food.  If you lose your job and take another for $30,000 a year, spend the same for food, you'll now be spending 33 1/3% of your income feeding your family.  If someone says you're spending way too much to eat, tell them "no I'm not, I'm spending the same and if I don't soon return my income to $40,000/yr soon, my family will probably be forced to eat less".  Don't allow these folks to accuse you of becoming a big spender when you're not.  All these charts can be used in funny and misleading ways.

The math above, to use swifty's words, is the absolute truth, because I know how to divide.  What you will find below, is my opinion.

It is the goal of Republicans to convince you that Obama is spending us into oblivion.  If they succeed, you may choose to vote Republican and then they'll make certain the Government "eats less" by privatizing or eliminating Medicare and Social Security altogether, not to mention a few other programs.  It's critical for them to convince you these deficits are the result of Government spending all the money and not because the Government has lost much of its revenue due to economic problems and tax cuts.  I went to the trouble of showing what percent spending has gone up each of the last 30+ years in another thead, if you're interested in comparing. 
PatGillickProtege

Registered:
Posts: 4,364
Reply with quote  #10 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewey
If you're on the fence...

Please don't be fooled by the numbers.  If you earn $40,000 a year and spend $10,000 yearly to feed your family, then 25% of your income is spent on food.  If you lose your job and take another for $30,000 a year, spend the same for food, you'll now be spending 33 1/3% of your income feeding your family.  If someone says you're spending way too much to eat, tell them "no I'm not, I'm spending the same and if I don't soon return my income to $40,000/yr soon, my family will probably be forced to eat less".  Don't allow these folks to accuse you of becoming a big spender when you're not.  All these charts can be used in funny and misleading ways.

The math above, to use swifty's words, is the absolute truth, because I know how to divide.  What you will find below, is my opinion.

It is the goal of Republicans to convince you that Obama is spending us into oblivion.  If they succeed, you may choose to vote Republican and then they'll make certain the Government "eats less" by privatizing or eliminating Medicare and Social Security altogether, not to mention a few other programs.  It's critical for them to convince you these deficits are the result of Government spending all the money and not because the Government has lost much of its revenue due to economic problems and tax cuts.  I went to the trouble of showing what percent spending has gone up each of the last 30+ years in another thead, if you're interested in comparing. 

Explain the motherf*cking deficit how it grew $5 Trillion in 2 and a half years of Bambi being President and spending like a drunken sailor on liberty looking for a whore house to go and get laid in?

Your creative accounting measures should be used by tax cheat Timmy "Squeak Scolari Little B*tch" Geithner.

__________________
Keep 'em moving Colonel, a man that eloquent has to be saved.
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #11 
If you're on the fence...

You should know the debt ceiling has been raised ten times since 2001.  It normally doesn't require this significant of a political battle.
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #12 
If you're on the fence...

Republicans often make it a point to say they think the wealthy pay too heavy a share of today's overall income taxes.  They suggest it's time for a flat tax.  If you engage a Conservative over such a proposal, ask if their flat tax idea will shift the overall tax burden more to the middle and lower classes, keep the current ratio relatively the same, or shift more tax obligation to the wealthy thus relieving the middle and/or lower classes?  Based on my opening sentence, I have difficulty believing it could be either of the latter two.  I think it's important to know.     
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #13 
If you're on the fence...

I'll be a bit partisan and point out some of the positives under President Obama.  We have experienced seven consecutive quarters of positive GDP growth through the first quarter of 2011.  We have had sixteen consecutive months of private sector job growth.  The unemployment rate is 8% lower than it was in December of 2009.  The stock market is up 60% since the President took office.

We have handed over power to Iraqi officials and we are beginning a draw down in Afghanistan.  We eliminated Osama Bin Laden.  I repeat, we found and eliminated Osama Bin Laden.  We put an end to the torture debate by the elimination of waterboarding.  Openly gay people will soon see all hurdles to serving this great Country removed in their entirety.

We have removed the lifetime limits on health care coverage.  Young adults can now stay on parent's health care insurance until 26 years of age.  It is now illegal to rescind insurance coverage of sick folks.  It is also illegal to deny coverage to people 19 and under for pre-existing conditions.  In addition, seniors receive free preventive services under Medicare.

Through credit card reforms, this President has restricted both interest rate increases and credit offered to college students.  Credit cannot be extended to those under 21 without verifying their ability to pay.  CC companies cannot arbitrarily raise rates until consumers are at least 60 days late.  Other financial reforms include regulating the derivative industry as well as other activities by the financial industry.

As for investing in our future, this President has provided tax credits towards a college education.  This may not be championed by all but I suspect it will pay off in the long run, not unlike so many other investments he's undertaken.

I understand there are those who find many of these very important changes to be totally unwarranted.  I couldn't disagree more but I'll give them one.  The unemployment rate needs to drop 30% or more as 8% is not enough.  I know this President would agree wholeheartedly and is focused on doing just that.






bluedog

Registered:
Posts: 10,012
Reply with quote  #14 
Quote:
54% of Americans feel the recession and unemployment rate is due to decisions made by President Bush during his 2 terms in office.  Only 24% think Obama is to blame.

 


Doesn't matter....If Obama doesn't fix it, well, he'll be a one-termer.....
Softballfanatic

Registered:
Posts: 1,152
Reply with quote  #15 

It is probably the same 54% who pay no federal income tax!


__________________
Jerry Wallace "For The Love Of The Game"
JoiseyGuy

Registered:
Posts: 24,434
Reply with quote  #16 
fanatic - And I quote Leonna Helmsly - "Only the little people pay taxes".  That would be those who cannot afford a good tax lawyer.  I can find nowhere a chart that notes in dollars net income after taxes by socio economic status strata (dare I say "classes"?), percentages of taxation be damned.  Can you direct me to one?  What do people in each socio economic strata have left spendable after taxes, including per capita taxes?  Yes, I'm basically egalitarian, but not to a fault (I want wealthy people to maintain a wealthy lifestyle and to continue to be entrepreneurs), unless ones perspective is that all taxes should be removed ala the 19th century.  Personally, I do not want to see my nation become a two tier socio economic situation like Dubai, with no middle class.     

Dewey - I don't believe that unemployment will change much (I don't care who is in office) as long as corporate America's emphasis is free market macro economics (profit motive for wealthy entrepreneurs - check the relatively happy stock market in a deflated economy) to the detriment of the micro economy.  Downsize and outsource (create unemployment) and create additional profit seems to be the mantra.  Small business in the USA is the only recourse for hiring that I see as viable, and I think that our federal laws should reflect that in addressing the unemployment situation.  

__________________
"Freethinkers are those who are willing to use their minds without prejudice and without fearing to understand things that clash with their own customs, privileges, or beliefs. This state of mind is not common, but it is essential for right thinking. Where it is absent discussion is apt to become worse than useless." Leo Tolstoy

"Do not try to teach pigs to sing. It will frustrate you and infuriate the pigs who will unite in anger against you, and you will never achieve singing your song". Dr. Petersen
Softballfanatic

Registered:
Posts: 1,152
Reply with quote  #17 
Mr. Bolton--Again with the famous quotes! Unfortunately this is a disputed matter. The quote is alleged by a former employee and the Helmsley's did in fact pay a pretty penny in taxes! Perhaps the added context is important!

"Her imperious ways were testified to at her 1989 tax evasion trial. According to a former employee, Helmsley once said, "Only the little people pay taxes." (She denied it, and records show that the Helmsleys paid $53 million in taxes for the years she was accused of evading payment of an additional $1.7 million.) The quote struck a chord, and huzzahs rang from the peasantry as the queen was trundled off to 21 months in the dungeon. The story played out like one of Grimm's sourer fairy tales."
From the New York Sun August 21, 2007

__________________
Jerry Wallace "For The Love Of The Game"
JoiseyGuy

Registered:
Posts: 24,434
Reply with quote  #18 
fanatic - I also like the quotation supposedly said by  Marie Antionette, not because she actually said it, but because it demonstrates an attitude possessed by some - When told by a servant that the people had no bread, she replied, "Well then, let them eat cake".  Never happened, but it does paint an accurate picture of the attitudes of some (especially royalty or those who think they are royalty).  One of my very favorites was spoken by my son at age 23.  When we explained that we would have to go out for dinner because the electricity in the house had gone out, he replied, "No problem.  We can cook in the microwave".  He is a very bright young man with two college degrees and a wonderful job.  Get the picture???   Each is really a societal perspective statement.        
__________________
"Freethinkers are those who are willing to use their minds without prejudice and without fearing to understand things that clash with their own customs, privileges, or beliefs. This state of mind is not common, but it is essential for right thinking. Where it is absent discussion is apt to become worse than useless." Leo Tolstoy

"Do not try to teach pigs to sing. It will frustrate you and infuriate the pigs who will unite in anger against you, and you will never achieve singing your song". Dr. Petersen
Softballfanatic

Registered:
Posts: 1,152
Reply with quote  #19 

Mr. Bolton-- But of course! But you did not have a comment that she paid $53 million in taxes during the time period in question!


__________________
Jerry Wallace "For The Love Of The Game"
slideby7

Registered:
Posts: 818
Reply with quote  #20 
Mr. Bolton, You like to quote her frequently.  I dare say she is not truly representative and you might know it.  The inexpensive software available today does your return for you, and that is if you even earn enough that it is remotely close to complicated.  The only people that may need a good tax lawyer can easily afford one.  I would suggest that some of the very far left websites or blogs probably have the information you are looking because they use it in their class warfare battle.  In your world, who would you appoint to be the egalitarian CZAR and would the criteria be?  I believe everyone should pay some tax.  If for no other reason than being responsible for the services provided and hopefully have a sense of self respect. 
How do you explain the 200 plus years of success we have enjoyed with corporate Americas emphasis on free market macro economics?  More often than not when we have problems it is when government sticks in fingers in the pie and make a mess.  It is like a scale and every time the government tips the scale one way it comes back in and tips it another.  Most often it is to the extreme in either direction and it never stops.

Are you suggesting the government pass laws making outsourcing illegal.  OMG


JoiseyGuy

Registered:
Posts: 24,434
Reply with quote  #21 
slideby 7 - I do mean this seriously.  Will you please give this thread your definition of a liberal philosophy and a conservative philosophy.  I only ask this because I have been involved in many discussions of "education" in which no definition of that was determined, and when it was, several were astonished that we were talking from different premises.  Thank you in advance.  If that is asking too much, perhaps you could do "conservative" and Dewey could do "liberal".  

PS - Would you also point out where I suggested that outsourcing should be made illegal, or was that merely a suggestive rhetorical question?  

fanatic - I'll take your word for the amount she paid in taxes.  Now, how much did she net after those taxes, spendable?  53 million over that time period for Helmsley was like 53 dollars for some citizens (hyperbole for effect).  I don't get the impression that she was hurting for her next meal - or her next mansion or Rolls.  Besides, she did 18 months in prison for tax evasion.  She did leave the bulk of her fortune to her doggie, Trouble, but having lived these many years with humans, I can understand that.    

__________________
"Freethinkers are those who are willing to use their minds without prejudice and without fearing to understand things that clash with their own customs, privileges, or beliefs. This state of mind is not common, but it is essential for right thinking. Where it is absent discussion is apt to become worse than useless." Leo Tolstoy

"Do not try to teach pigs to sing. It will frustrate you and infuriate the pigs who will unite in anger against you, and you will never achieve singing your song". Dr. Petersen
slideby7

Registered:
Posts: 818
Reply with quote  #22 
Mr. Bolton, I would be happy to try, just not right now.  When I do, I need you to clarify in what context.  You said philosophy.  Do you mean politically, academically or some other context?  After you clarify the foregoing I will attempt to do so if you extend me the courtesy of responding to my points and questions in my post that was responsive to yours.  Thank you.

BillSmith

Registered:
Posts: 6,595
Reply with quote  #23 
If you're on the fence...
 
Don't stay there long, things have a way of getting testy.

__________________
Sometimes you are the mole, sometimes the mushroom.
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #24 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BillSmith
If you're on the fence...
 
Don't stay there long, things have a way of getting testy.

Only on the so called wedgey issues.

Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #25 
If you're on the fence...

Please know that raising the debt ceiling is an issue that is generally not held hostage for the purpose of gaining favorable legislation, like is happening today.  Metaphorically speaking, I liken it to Democrats and the President being "waterboarded" by the Republicans...

  "Say it!  Zero revenues, zero revenues.  Say it!"   grgle...grgle...grgle...
 

The annual fiscal budget is fair game to fight over, tooth and nail.  Do what you have to do to obtain the budget you see fit.  Shut the Government down if you must.  However, to hold the overall financial picture of this Country, and her citizens, hostage by ignoring all our indebtedness previously negotiated, debated, and legislated by past sessions of Congress, is terribly unfair.  I certainly hope the vast majority of this Country can see exactly what's going on and will hold those responsible for the hostage taking accountable. 
JoiseyGuy

Registered:
Posts: 24,434
Reply with quote  #26 
slideby 7 - OK, here are the "courtesy" answers as best I can.  I don't know who I would make the egalitarion CZAR, but I know it wouldn't be someone from Bush Jr's societal echelon.  Some folks who are fortunate enough to have elevated horizons don't realize that there are many people in our nation who never heard of either a tax lawyer or a software packet that does taxes.  I agree that everyone should pay taxes beyond per capita taxes based on net income and that all loopholes should be closed (graduated income taxes which demand much, much more from those who would by any standard be considered wealthy).  I do want the wealthy to remain wealthy and continue as entrepreneurs. In discussing tax burdens, I choose to discuss the net of an individual or group after taxes, and whether that remaining spendable allows for a lifestyle socio economically speaking from which the original taxes were drawn.  I do not  suggest that the very  wealthy should suddenly become middle class as a result of income taxing.  I also agree about the concept of self respect.  I always allowed poor kids to come to my softball schools for free, but I always charged them a dollar, and they "earned" their "scholarship by picking up equipment after camp and putting it away.   If they didn't have a glove, I "found" one for them.  Capitalism, by its very nature ultimately creates a royal elite class (remember the Robber Barons?) who become richer through entrepreneurship or ownership, so when you say that 200 years of free market economy brought success, one must answer, "To whom?" and respond by asking then why was there a necessity for unions?  As for laws that  affect economics, I only ask that any government that passes them consider all of our citizens and not be for sale to the highest bidder.  That's the best that I can do.     
__________________
"Freethinkers are those who are willing to use their minds without prejudice and without fearing to understand things that clash with their own customs, privileges, or beliefs. This state of mind is not common, but it is essential for right thinking. Where it is absent discussion is apt to become worse than useless." Leo Tolstoy

"Do not try to teach pigs to sing. It will frustrate you and infuriate the pigs who will unite in anger against you, and you will never achieve singing your song". Dr. Petersen
slideby7

Registered:
Posts: 818
Reply with quote  #27 
Mr. Bolton, You could have answered me without the sarcasm, but thanks anyway.   I don't know who I would make the egalitarion CZAR, but I know it wouldn't be someone from Bush Jr's societal echelon.  And I would fear the opposite, and therein lies the problem.  Some folks who are fortunate enough to have elevated horizons don't realize that there are many people in our nation who never heard of either a tax lawyer or a software packet that does taxes.  Most of these don't need either, but they could in fact ask someone, say a friend, relative or employer.  I agree that everyone should pay taxes beyond per capita taxes based on net income and that all loopholes should be closed (graduated income taxes which demand much, much more from those who would by any standard be considered wealthy).  I don't know what per capita taxes are, and we a a progressive income already.  I do want the wealthy to remain wealthy and continue as entrepreneurs. In discussing tax burdens, I choose to discuss the net of an individual or group after taxes, and whether that remaining spendable allows for a lifestyle socio economically speaking from which the original taxes were drawn.  It is none of your business, nor is it mine what someone else's net is, and the life style that is allowed is not up to you, the government or the CZAR.  I do not  suggest that the very  wealthy should suddenly become middle class as a result of income taxing.  I also agree about the concept of self respect.  I always allowed poor kids to come to my softball schools for free, but I always charged them a dollar, and they "earned" their "scholarship by picking up equipment after camp and putting it away.   If they didn't have a glove, I "found" one for them.  Capitalism, by its very nature ultimately creates a royal elite class (remember the Robber Barons?) who become richer through entrepreneurship or ownership, so when you say that 200 years of free market economy brought success, one must answer, "To whom?" and respond by asking then why was there a necessity for unions?  We have laws that protect workers.  Unions were in fact a result of a free capitalist market that gave workers the ability to negotiate.  Now they hold employers hostage and are greatly responsible for some of our economic woes including the outsourcing yous rail about.  As for laws that  affect economics, I only ask that any government that passes them consider all of our citizens and not be for sale to the highest bidder. Or union thugs.   That's the best that I can do.  Thanks for the effort.  With all do respect, I find your answer very simplistic and not specific enough to be acted on.  On that note, here is my stab at your question, at least as it relates to political philosophy.

Liberals believe in government action to achieve equality for all regardless of the unintended consequences.  It is the duty of the government to alleviate social ills and to protect its version of civil liberties and individual and human rights.  They believe the role of the government should be to guarantee that no one is in need.  Liberal policies generally emphasize the need for the government to solve all the ills and problems of the world.

 

Conservatives believe in personal responsibility, limited government, free markets, individual liberty, traditional American values and a strong national defense.  They believe the role of government should be to provide people the freedom necessary to pursue their own goals. 
 
Conservative policies generally emphasize empowerment of the individual to solve problems.


Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,423
Reply with quote  #28 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewey
If you're on the fence...

Please know that raising the debt ceiling is an issue that is generally not held hostage for the purpose of gaining favorable legislation, like is happening today.  Metaphorically speaking, I liken it to Democrats and the President being "waterboarded" by the Republicans...

  "Say it!  Zero revenues, zero revenues.  Say it!"   grgle...grgle...grgle...
 

The annual fiscal budget is fair game to fight over, tooth and nail.  Do what you have to do to obtain the budget you see fit.  Shut the Government down if you must.  However, to hold the overall financial picture of this Country, and her citizens, hostage by ignoring all our indebtedness previously negotiated, debated, and legislated by past sessions of Congress, is terribly unfair.  I certainly hope the vast majority of this Country can see exactly what's going on and will hold those responsible for the hostage taking accountable. 


Imagine if your employer withheld your pay until you agreed to sign the soon to be next contract for your services at lower compensation.  I suppose you'd say, "sir/maam, I earned that money.  Feel free to negotiate as hard as you wish on our next contract but that money you're holding was promised to me for service completed."  If your employer could get away with it, he'd have a lot of leverage holding your money.  That's what Republicans are doing today.  Not letting us pay our bills until we agree on how much to spend during the next cycle.

Most opinions throughout the centuries have agreed that giving into hostage taking simply invites more hostage taking down the road.  It's true, it's a hard line to take, but it must be held.  Not giving in will be extremely painful today, as it always is, but it's necessary to save many more heartaches, for everyone, in the future.  We talk about our concern for our children but I have to believe allowing political hostage taking to be successful may be one of the worst consequences we could ever allow to be passed down.

I say if Republicans want to rule the day, get out there, campaign, win two houses of Government, and run with it.  Allowing 230 some folks to stop everything in it's tracks is both dangerous and unfair.    
slideby7

Registered:
Posts: 818
Reply with quote  #29 
Mr. Dewey, Very interesting concept comparing money one has earned and is entitled to, to money to be borrowed and suggesting the borrower is entitled to it.
JoiseyGuy

Registered:
Posts: 24,434
Reply with quote  #30 
slideby 7 - HUH ???  Where is the sarcasm?  I am completely baffled by your take on what I wrote.  I think you owe me an apology as in no way was I doing anything but being mannerly and doing as you asked as a matter of respect for your request for answers.  I was, as you suggested, giving you the courtesy of a reply. Wow, I'm totally shocked !!!!   I went back and read what I wrote and still see nothing that could be mistaken for sarcasm.  I can't believe that you wrote that after I complied with your request.    
PS - Thank you for your definitions of liberal and conservative.  

__________________
"Freethinkers are those who are willing to use their minds without prejudice and without fearing to understand things that clash with their own customs, privileges, or beliefs. This state of mind is not common, but it is essential for right thinking. Where it is absent discussion is apt to become worse than useless." Leo Tolstoy

"Do not try to teach pigs to sing. It will frustrate you and infuriate the pigs who will unite in anger against you, and you will never achieve singing your song". Dr. Petersen
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.