Historical Rankings of Presidents

[DiamondDave]

Which specific entitlement programs are you referring?

Social Security has been a fantastic safety net. Medicare as an offshoot, much later, also a fantastic entitlement program that has helped move our society forward.

I, personally am fiscally conservative, but arguing that Social Security passed in the 1930s is somehow a bad thing is a really hard point to argue.

Yes, we need to reform some entitlement programs, and perhaps get rid of some others altogether, but Social Security, specifically, is a good thing and has been for a long time, just needs to be reformed over time.

I believe Food Stamps and Unemployment started under FDR. There's a reasonable argument to be made that those programs cause an "entitlement" issue. They were close to a necessity at the time and can be reformed going forward.

Most of the entitlement programs are paid for by the recipient from working over time. It's protection for our society.

Social Security has been a huge DISASTER... entitlement junkies and those blinded by entitlement propaganda are about the only ones that consider it any sort of success... And Medicare, are you fucking serious?? Please look at the amounts of governmental control in combination with the huge red tape (and associated governmental expenditures over ALL areas of government that have their hands in these entitlement pots)... please also look on the average rates of return on normal investment in comparison to the return rate to social security... not to mention the abuses of the SS fund that were facilitated thanks to Mr. FDR's efforts to create this socialist program and associated slush fund

Most entitlement programs are NOT paid for by the recipient over time.. the opposite is indeed true... the non-contributors to societal government are paid for by the contributors at enormous expense for not only the handout by the bloated government behind it

All government entitlement programs where the recipient is not a ward of the state should be completely eliminated... it is not the job of government to be your mommy, your nanny, your personal safety net, or your boo boo kisser


Charity and personal responsibility should be the ONLY personal safety nets in this country... you and you alone are the only one responsible for your personal needs and well being.... it is not someone else's job.. and for those people who like to VOLUNTARILY help out their fellow citizens, more power to us all... choose the cause of your liking... choose whether you want it to be local help or national help or international help or anything in between... if someone is deemed incapable or incompetent enough to help themselves, then it may be necessary to have them committed or deemed wards of the state (like many challenged people without family)...

The touchy feely bullshit that has been painfully injected into our constitutional government has mutated our system into a multi-tendril monster of enormous size and scope.. not at all what was intended..

The creation of his policies and programs not only did immediate damage and extended the depression, but set piss poor precedent and has warped our government for generations

What good he did in decisions during the war effort (notice I did not say his policies on the war before we actually joined the fights) is counterbalanced by the irreparable damage he caused the overall system of federal government....

 

[The Rabbi]

The benefits of these things are easy to see. The liabilities much greater. But the liabilities of these programs far outstrip the benefits.

 

[rightwinger]

Which specific entitlement programs are you referring?

Social Security has been a fantastic safety net. Medicare as an offshoot, much later, also a fantastic entitlement program that has helped move our society forward.

I, personally am fiscally conservative, but arguing that Social Security passed in the 1930s is somehow a bad thing is a really hard point to argue.

Yes, we need to reform some entitlement programs, and perhaps get rid of some others altogether, but Social Security, specifically, is a good thing and has been for a long time, just needs to be reformed over time.

I believe Food Stamps and Unemployment started under FDR. There's a reasonable argument to be made that those programs cause an "entitlement" issue. They were close to a necessity at the time and can be reformed going forward.

Most of the entitlement programs are paid for by the recipient from working over time. It's protection for our society.

What these so called "entitlement programs" did was move us to being a modern society. Modern societies take care of their citizens. They realize that the Darwin styled survival of the fittest means that people will suffer.

Modern societies do not have throw away people. As Americans, we realize that we need to take care of our less fortunate and not have to rely on chance or begging to take care of us when times are bad

 

[ElephantMcDonk]

Please reference Social Security, Medicare, and Unemployment and explain how those benefits have been paid for by contributors to non-contributors.


Irreparable damage to our federal government comes from venturing into unnecessary wars and unnecessary spending on the military industrial complex and putting it on a federal credit card, instead of taxing the wealthy.

Social Security and Medicare are about 40% of the budget. They need to be reformed as the baby boomer generation is huge and going to live a long time, but those reforms will happen sooner than later. As for the return on investment, I agree with you somewhat, but you can't throw out the baby with the bath water. Or let's not make perfect, the enemy of the good. Those "entitlements" contributed to by working are part of the fabric of our society and what makes America a place people want to come. Not only is the American Dream only possible to pursue here, but there's a safety net if you don't reach it. We still have the most millionaires and billionaires in the world here. That safety net is not stifling society.

 

[DiamondDave]

Please reference Social Security, Medicare, and Unemployment and explain how those benefits have been paid for by contributors to non-contributors.


Irreparable damage to our federal government comes from venturing into unnecessary wars and unnecessary spending on the military industrial complex and putting it on a federal credit card, instead of taxing the wealthy.

Social Security and Medicare are about 40% of the budget. They need to be reformed as the baby boomer generation is huge and going to live a long time, but those reforms will happen sooner than later. As for the return on investment, I agree with you somewhat, but you can't throw out the baby with the bath water. Or let's not make perfect, the enemy of the good. Those "entitlements" contributed to by working are part of the fabric of our society and what makes America a place people want to come. Not only is the American Dream only possible to pursue here, but there's a safety net if you don't reach it. We still have the most millionaires and billionaires in the world here. That safety net is not stifling society.

Unemployment is indeed paid for by those receiving it... that one you will get no argument...


However... non contributors can and do receive benefits from systems such as SS and Medicare.... not to mention the other bastard entitlement programs that have spun off thanks to FDR's precedent...

War and national defense are actually a charge of the federal government... your personal wants, needs, and well being are not... try reading your constitution... and do yourself a favor and don't take snips out of context from it like some many other entitlement junkies do in this forum

Nothing should be done by 'taxing the wealthy'... but thanks for showing us your class warfare stance.... we get a better picture of you now.... you show that you are indeed a supporter of selective equal treatment by government... while I am known by most in here to completely be the opposite... equal treatment and blind treatment for all by government... regardless of income or whatever else.... any taxation should be an equal % burden on every citizen on every dollar in every case or instance of taxation... not some guilt ridden touchy-feely sob story based bullshit 'progressive' system to try and have the greedy lazy bums feed off of an vilify the 'evil rich'

The alleged 'safety nets' are INDEED stifling and hindering our country and society.... to the point of crippling us

 

[rightwinger]

Please reference Social Security, Medicare, and Unemployment and explain how those benefits have been paid for by contributors to non-contributors.


Irreparable damage to our federal government comes from venturing into unnecessary wars and unnecessary spending on the military industrial complex and putting it on a federal credit card, instead of taxing the wealthy.

Social Security and Medicare are about 40% of the budget. They need to be reformed as the baby boomer generation is huge and going to live a long time, but those reforms will happen sooner than later. As for the return on investment, I agree with you somewhat, but you can't throw out the baby with the bath water. Or let's not make perfect, the enemy of the good. Those "entitlements" contributed to by working are part of the fabric of our society and what makes America a place people want to come. Not only is the American Dream only possible to pursue here, but there's a safety net if you don't reach it. We still have the most millionaires and billionaires in the world here. That safety net is not stifling society.

Unemployment is indeed paid for by those receiving it... that one you will get no argument...


However... non contributors can and do receive benefits from systems such as SS and Medicare.... not to mention the other bastard entitlement programs that have spun off thanks to FDR's precedent...

War and national defense are actually a charge of the federal government... your personal wants, needs, and well being are not... try reading your constitution... and do yourself a favor and don't take snips out of context from it like some many other entitlement junkies do in this forum

Nothing should be done by 'taxing the wealthy'... but thanks for showing us your class warfare stance.... we get a better picture of you now.... you show that you are indeed a supporter of selective equal treatment by government... while I am known by most in here to completely be the opposite... equal treatment and blind treatment for all by government... regardless of income or whatever else.... any taxation should be an equal % burden on every citizen on every dollar in every case or instance of taxation... not some guilt ridden touchy-feely sob story based bullshit 'progressive' system to try and have the greedy lazy bums feed off of an vilify the 'evil rich'

The alleged 'safety nets' are INDEED stifling and hindering our country and society.... to the point of crippling us

Great societies are not about making money for its wealthiest members. A modern society looks after its less fortunate. The days of Dikensonian treatment of the poor are long gone.
All modern societies maintain a safety net to ensure its less fortunate are taken care of.

 

[Retread Ol' 37]

I appreciate your service, but your opinion is 1 person's opinion.

You say anyone that puts FDR in the top 8 is stupid.

16 polls of experts have him ranked 1,2, or 3, none have him ranked lower than 3rd.
Maybe they know something you don't.

If you mean Obama shouldn't be on a list yet, because we don't have enough information, fine. If instead you mean he doesn't deserve to be on a list with the rest of them, then I shouldn't have responded to your post at all, because we obviously know where you stand.

With regards to Carter being in the top 40, there have only been 44 Presidents, one currently serving. Carter is not ranked worse than 34th on any of the polls.

Of Warren Harding, James Buchanan and Andrew Johnson who does Carter rank behind?

I thought carter's biggest success was using his former presidency to elevate himself to a position after he lost the election where he became a powerful advocate for Habitat For Humanity and every global charity he could get his hands into. As a president, he was better than those you mentioned, along with Grant, Fillmore and Tyler, but he couldn't handle.

 

[DiamondDave]

Please reference Social Security, Medicare, and Unemployment and explain how those benefits have been paid for by contributors to non-contributors.


Irreparable damage to our federal government comes from venturing into unnecessary wars and unnecessary spending on the military industrial complex and putting it on a federal credit card, instead of taxing the wealthy.

Social Security and Medicare are about 40% of the budget. They need to be reformed as the baby boomer generation is huge and going to live a long time, but those reforms will happen sooner than later. As for the return on investment, I agree with you somewhat, but you can't throw out the baby with the bath water. Or let's not make perfect, the enemy of the good. Those "entitlements" contributed to by working are part of the fabric of our society and what makes America a place people want to come. Not only is the American Dream only possible to pursue here, but there's a safety net if you don't reach it. We still have the most millionaires and billionaires in the world here. That safety net is not stifling society.

Unemployment is indeed paid for by those receiving it... that one you will get no argument...


However... non contributors can and do receive benefits from systems such as SS and Medicare.... not to mention the other bastard entitlement programs that have spun off thanks to FDR's precedent...

War and national defense are actually a charge of the federal government... your personal wants, needs, and well being are not... try reading your constitution... and do yourself a favor and don't take snips out of context from it like some many other entitlement junkies do in this forum

Nothing should be done by 'taxing the wealthy'... but thanks for showing us your class warfare stance.... we get a better picture of you now.... you show that you are indeed a supporter of selective equal treatment by government... while I am known by most in here to completely be the opposite... equal treatment and blind treatment for all by government... regardless of income or whatever else.... any taxation should be an equal % burden on every citizen on every dollar in every case or instance of taxation... not some guilt ridden touchy-feely sob story based bullshit 'progressive' system to try and have the greedy lazy bums feed off of an vilify the 'evil rich'

The alleged 'safety nets' are INDEED stifling and hindering our country and society.... to the point of crippling us

Great societies are not about making money for its wealthiest members. A modern society looks after its less fortunate. The days of Dikensonian treatment of the poor are long gone.
All modern societies maintain a safety net to ensure its less fortunate are taken care of.

You are right.. the government does not exist to make money for anyone... rich or poor... it is about the freedom to do what you will with your decisions, efforts, labors, talents, whatever,,,,

A good person chooses to look out after others... but that is a PERSONAL choice to do with your personal efforts and resources... not for you thru government to get your generosity kicks at someone else's expense

 

[Wry Catcher]

I'm a Reagan hater, so I can understand going against popular sentiment. I think Reagan could be the catalyst to our downfall if we're not careful. Some of you seem to think, FDR falls into that category.

No specifics mind you. If you want to get specific I'll be happy to address. I assume you're referring to entitlements? What happens at theses tea parties? Does everyone point out policies that FDR, LBJ, Carter, and Obama pushed, espoused, and had passed under their leadership and then declares they're the worst thing to happen to America?

I wonder what specific policies enacted under FDR lead you folks to look down on him as President. Anyone care to get specific?

You have excited the echo chamber, ElephantMcDonk, and asked a question. In my experience you've invited highly caustic attacks on your character and the question will go unanswered. The echo chamber understands as much about what they write as the cliff does when a loud whistle bounces off its walls.

Coming from someone who cannot engage in serious debate.

Anyway, we could go through the domestic programs and detail how each one served to deepen and prolong the Depression but the main change is: FDR was the first president to say it was government's jobs to solve problems that had previously been solved privately, by families, communities and charities.
This resulted in an entitlement mentality that is sadly with us today. We see it everyday, even on these boards.
That is the problem.

The problem is Rabbi, you offer simple explanations to complex issues. All things economic were not going so well before FDR, or did you rewrite history again?

 

[ElephantMcDonk]

Warren Buffett figures he pays 16% of his income to tax and his secretary pays 32%. I'm not suggesting that it should be equal. 32% is too much for Buffett to pay, but it should be closer. Defense accounts for at least 23% of our federal budget. That's way too much. We spend ridiculous sums of money on supposed defense. We could protect our citizens for probably less than 1/2 of that. I don't want my tax dollars going to make weapons and warcraft we don't need and to pay for soldiers to fight in wars we shouldn't be fighting. Our military is bigger than the next 25 largest combined. That's absurd and it comes from a country that's been propagandized to that it's necessary to have that big of a machine. We're protected by two oceans. Modern warfare can in large part be taken care of by special forces and technology. We need a decent size budget for the military and a nice size army, but nowhere near to the extent we have.

The major entitlement programs that are expensive are primarily covered by the contributor. Most of the expense is dollar for dollar going back to the contributor. The amount that's not is negligible in the big picture. The other entitlements are annoying to those that don't receive them. I don't want to pay for someone else's food stamps. But they are not a major drain on the overall budget and a reasonable safety net for our fellow man imo.

What part of Social Security and Medicare do people feel entitled to and therefore it creates negative outcomes and/or laziness? I don't see much correlation at all. The positive effects however are obvious.

Those are your 3 biggest expenses Social Security, Medicare, Defense.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Please reference Social Security, Medicare, and Unemployment and explain how those benefits have been paid for by contributors to non-contributors.


Irreparable damage to our federal government comes from venturing into unnecessary wars and unnecessary spending on the military industrial complex and putting it on a federal credit card, instead of taxing the wealthy.

Social Security and Medicare are about 40% of the budget. They need to be reformed as the baby boomer generation is huge and going to live a long time, but those reforms will happen sooner than later. As for the return on investment, I agree with you somewhat, but you can't throw out the baby with the bath water. Or let's not make perfect, the enemy of the good. Those "entitlements" contributed to by working are part of the fabric of our society and what makes America a place people want to come. Not only is the American Dream only possible to pursue here, but there's a safety net if you don't reach it. We still have the most millionaires and billionaires in the world here. That safety net is not stifling society.

Unemployment is indeed paid for by those receiving it... that one you will get no argument...


However... non contributors can and do receive benefits from systems such as SS and Medicare.... not to mention the other bastard entitlement programs that have spun off thanks to FDR's precedent...

War and national defense are actually a charge of the federal government... your personal wants, needs, and well being are not... try reading your constitution... and do yourself a favor and don't take snips out of context from it like some many other entitlement junkies do in this forum

Nothing should be done by 'taxing the wealthy'... but thanks for showing us your class warfare stance.... we get a better picture of you now.... you show that you are indeed a supporter of selective equal treatment by government... while I am known by most in here to completely be the opposite... equal treatment and blind treatment for all by government... regardless of income or whatever else.... any taxation should be an equal % burden on every citizen on every dollar in every case or instance of taxation... not some guilt ridden touchy-feely sob story based bullshit 'progressive' system to try and have the greedy lazy bums feed off of an vilify the 'evil rich'

The alleged 'safety nets' are INDEED stifling and hindering our country and society.... to the point of crippling us

Great societies are not about making money for its wealthiest members. A modern society looks after its less fortunate. The days of Dikensonian treatment of the poor are long gone.
All modern societies maintain a safety net to ensure its less fortunate are taken care of.

A reading of History clearly shows that when a society puts its citizens on the dole it is dooming that society to eventual failure.

 

[DiamondDave]

Warren Buffett figures he pays 16% of his income to tax and his secretary pays 32%. I'm not suggesting that it should be equal. 32% is too much for Buffett to pay, but it should be closer. Defense accounts for at least 23% of our federal budget. That's way too much. We spend ridiculous sums of money on supposed defense. We could protect our citizens for probably less than 1/2 of that. I don't want my tax dollars going to make weapons and warcraft we don't need and to pay for soldiers to fight in wars we shouldn't be fighting. Our military is bigger than the next 25 largest combined. That's absurd and it comes from a country that's been propagandized to that it's necessary to have that big of a machine. We're protected by two oceans. Modern warfare can in large part be taken care of by special forces and technology. We need a decent size budget for the military and a nice size army, but nowhere near to the extent we have.

The major entitlement programs that are expensive are covered by the contributor. Most of the expense is dollar for dollar going back to the contributor. The amount that's not is negligible in the big picture. The other entitlements are annoying to those that don't receive them. I don't want to pay for someone els's food stamps. But they are not a major drain on the overall budget and a reasonable safety net for our fellow man imo.

What part of Social Security and Medicare do people feel entitled to and therefore it creates negative outcomes and/or laziness? I don't see much correlation at all. The positive effects however are obvious.

Those are your 3 biggest expenses Social Security, Medicare, Defense.

Nah.. when a middle class or upper middle class person has a total taxation burden close to, at, or above 50%, the governmental system and reach is not too big

Entitlement programs are not just for the contributor in cases of SS, Medicare, etc.. this is indeed fact, whether you choose to ignore it or not... not to mention the huge governmental overhead and waste involved in the numerous tendrils of that system

And I AM suggesting that %burden of tax on income should be EQUAL... not selective equality... not some over complicated system where loopholes can be found

Whether you feel we should be fighting a war or what weapons are necessary is irrelevant.... I've been out there... and I have said "fuck you" many times to ones that even said to my face that we should not fund our military to the levels we do..... granted there needs to be a crackdown on wasteful and fraudulent contractors on military projects, etc.... but as stated, national defense is a charge of the government... your pride, your food for your belly, your cable TV bill, etc are not anyone else's responsibility but yours

 

[Wry Catcher]

Unemployment is indeed paid for by those receiving it... that one you will get no argument...


However... non contributors can and do receive benefits from systems such as SS and Medicare.... not to mention the other bastard entitlement programs that have spun off thanks to FDR's precedent...

War and national defense are actually a charge of the federal government... your personal wants, needs, and well being are not... try reading your constitution... and do yourself a favor and don't take snips out of context from it like some many other entitlement junkies do in this forum

Nothing should be done by 'taxing the wealthy'... but thanks for showing us your class warfare stance.... we get a better picture of you now.... you show that you are indeed a supporter of selective equal treatment by government... while I am known by most in here to completely be the opposite... equal treatment and blind treatment for all by government... regardless of income or whatever else.... any taxation should be an equal % burden on every citizen on every dollar in every case or instance of taxation... not some guilt ridden touchy-feely sob story based bullshit 'progressive' system to try and have the greedy lazy bums feed off of an vilify the 'evil rich'

The alleged 'safety nets' are INDEED stifling and hindering our country and society.... to the point of crippling us

Great societies are not about making money for its wealthiest members. A modern society looks after its less fortunate. The days of Dikensonian treatment of the poor are long gone.
All modern societies maintain a safety net to ensure its less fortunate are taken care of.

A reading of History clearly shows that when a society puts its citizens on the dole it is dooming that society to eventual failure.

Really? Would you be so kind as to write a book report? I would have suspected an historical account of those societies which exploited their populace would have a higher rate of failure. Silly me, I must have read the wrong history. Who wrote yours?
I fully expect an answer. If "History clearly shows..." you must have it at your fingertips.

Oh, and Diamond Dave, Unemployed is paid for by the employer, I believe.

 

[The Rabbi]

You have excited the echo chamber, ElephantMcDonk, and asked a question. In my experience you've invited highly caustic attacks on your character and the question will go unanswered. The echo chamber understands as much about what they write as the cliff does when a loud whistle bounces off its walls.

Coming from someone who cannot engage in serious debate.

Anyway, we could go through the domestic programs and detail how each one served to deepen and prolong the Depression but the main change is: FDR was the first president to say it was government's jobs to solve problems that had previously been solved privately, by families, communities and charities.
This resulted in an entitlement mentality that is sadly with us today. We see it everyday, even on these boards.
That is the problem.

The problem is Rabbi, you offer simple explanations to complex issues. All things economic were not going so well before FDR, or did you rewrite history again?

that's it? "They weren't going so well"? That's your argument??
In fact the U.S. achieved a world class level of industrialization from the end of the Civil war to the 1920s. Off hand I do not know what the growth rate in GDP was but I would bet phenomenal.
After FDR that rate slowed dramatically. Things appeared fine because we were the lone industrial power after WW2. But once the Germans and Japanese rebuilt their infrastructure we were at a competitive loss.
We still have a taxation and social welfare system that discourages productivity, earning, and risk taking and rewards the opposite.

 

[The Rabbi]

Great societies are not about making money for its wealthiest members. A modern society looks after its less fortunate. The days of Dikensonian treatment of the poor are long gone.
All modern societies maintain a safety net to ensure its less fortunate are taken care of.

A reading of History clearly shows that when a society puts its citizens on the dole it is dooming that society to eventual failure.

Really? Would you be so kind as to write a book report? I would have suspected an historical account of those societies which exploited their populace would have a higher rate of failure. Silly me, I must have read the wrong history. Who wrote yours?
I fully expect an answer. If "History clearly shows..." you must have it at your fingertips.

Oh, and Diamond Dave, Unemployed is paid for by the employer, I believe.

East Germany. Russia. Cuba. Ireland. Virtually any place with high taxation and high social benefits eventually finds that regime unsustainable and must either reform or die.

 

[rightwinger]

Unemployment is indeed paid for by those receiving it... that one you will get no argument...


However... non contributors can and do receive benefits from systems such as SS and Medicare.... not to mention the other bastard entitlement programs that have spun off thanks to FDR's precedent...

War and national defense are actually a charge of the federal government... your personal wants, needs, and well being are not... try reading your constitution... and do yourself a favor and don't take snips out of context from it like some many other entitlement junkies do in this forum

Nothing should be done by 'taxing the wealthy'... but thanks for showing us your class warfare stance.... we get a better picture of you now.... you show that you are indeed a supporter of selective equal treatment by government... while I am known by most in here to completely be the opposite... equal treatment and blind treatment for all by government... regardless of income or whatever else.... any taxation should be an equal % burden on every citizen on every dollar in every case or instance of taxation... not some guilt ridden touchy-feely sob story based bullshit 'progressive' system to try and have the greedy lazy bums feed off of an vilify the 'evil rich'

The alleged 'safety nets' are INDEED stifling and hindering our country and society.... to the point of crippling us

Great societies are not about making money for its wealthiest members. A modern society looks after its less fortunate. The days of Dikensonian treatment of the poor are long gone.
All modern societies maintain a safety net to ensure its less fortunate are taken care of.

A reading of History clearly shows that when a society puts its citizens on the dole it is dooming that society to eventual failure.

I'm afraid that what history shows is that when societies ignore their less fortunate at the expense of ensuring continued wealth for the rich THOSE are the societies that are doomed to fail

 

[ElephantMcDonk]

Re:
DiamondDaveNah.. when a middle class or upper middle class person has a total taxation burden close to, at, or above 50%, the governmental system and reach is not too big (sarcasm)

Who pays 50%?!

With regard to the military, I think our soldiers should be equipped as well as possible. I'm just guessing that it wouldn't cost $400,000 per soldier to do that if our government made the most intelligent decisions. I also don't think we'd need 1,500,000 active duty and close to 1,000,000 reservists if we weren't into military adventurism and spreading the good word. Our military is a much bigger expense that could be more efficient and less expensive and have equal effectiveness and save us a fortune, relative to the minimal, relative expense that unearned entitlements equates to. I understand that our government has a responsibility to protect us and the military is a necessary expense. We should and could have the best military in the world with the best, most well equipped soldiers as we do today and yet it cost a whole lot less.

 

[ElephantMcDonk]

Some of you are smart, but can't see the forest for the trees or don't want to. I'm a fiscal conservative, but...

My hunch is that the most bitter anger from fiscal conservative right wingers (I'm not one of them) is a deep-seeded madness, perhaps even subconscious that your tax dollars and our debt is going to poor people of other races food stamps and Medicaid and what not. That pisses you off because not a penny should go to that, while all it does is make them lazy and take more of your money. It builds on itself and makes you hate everything progressive. I get it. It makes sense in some ways. Kind of like the anger for bailing out GM or AIG. In spite of the fact, that we'll get most of the money back and if we didn't do it we could have been in another Great Depression with horrific ramifications, it's the principle of the thing. Free enterprise, no corporation should get bailed out, sets a bad precedent. But, what does it all amount to? Next to nothing.

The major costs of our society that cause large tax burdens and debt are not those things. The things that do cause those issues are complicated, but they're really the things that need to be addressed. This other stuff is smoke and mirrors when it comes to making politics out of it.

Major entitlements (Social Security and Medicare) and defense account for almost 70% of the budget. That's where we need to cut. All 3 need some cuts. We also need to raise more revenue from somewhere. The wealthiest Americans with lower tax rates than they've seen in forever are probably a good place to start.

Oh, and Social Security and Medicare need to be reformed because of demographics and some things we've learned over time. They're still good programs with lots of intrinsic value, even if they're not run very well.

 

[The Rabbi]

That's the stupidest, silliest post I've seen here all week. And that's saying something.
You don't know what's in people's minds. Hell, you hardly know what's in your mind. You are patronizing, infantile and dowright wrong.

 

[ElephantMcDonk]

Perhaps Rabbi,

Understand I live in Texas. More voters in the 2010 elections from Texas identified with the Tea Party than any other state. This board is probably less full of those type of people than I see every day, but they're out there. Lots of them. Mindless drones, buying in to every word Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and their like-minded, dim-witted friends think. They're losing "their" society. Caucasians, mostly men, believing they're losing out on opportunity to others and damn if on top of that, those others are going to get a dime they didn't earn out of their pocket. That sentiment is alive and well and a driving force. It's the same reason the church is able to control the masses, people want to believe so they do. In this case, people want to have party against those others. Reality doesn't come into the picture. They're hungry for something, yummy bullshit. And that's what they're fed.