I am going to be honest with you

[Avatar4321]

I am going to be honest with you....I like some government and living within a first world society.
1. I want good infrastructure that doesn't fall apart as I drive across bridges
2. I want clean water and air...The epa has done a good job these past 40 years. China or India is utterly unacceptable for America.
3. I want clean food and medication. I don't want to live in a nation that looks like Mexico or China for our standards.
4. I believe antitrust is needed to protect the little guy starting up his business from the sharks.
5. I believe in a safetynet for our poor and disabled. That is the moral and right thing to do.
6. I believe in science and advancement into tech....We're cutting edge because we do what the rest of the third world doesn't.
7. I believe in education for all. Education is at the core of our success as a nation.
8. I believe in workers rights and safety standards.

If you think we don't need any of this and it is "want", want, want...Well, maybe you don't belong within a civilized society.

Conservatards also believe in those things. What they don't believe in is paying for those things.

It's almost as if they think Jesus will sprinkle his magic fairy dust around and those things will magically happen.

Lying and mocking the Lord. Both pretty crummy things to do.

The issue isn't whether we pay for it but who pays for it.

Do I pay for it through my hard work and industry? Or does someone else pay for it, i.e. the government ?

Does the state pay for it or the federal government?

Do we keep the power in our hands and locally or do we send it to a centralized power thousands of miles away from us and the problems we face?

Do we pretend to do something by telling some politician or bureaucrat to take someone else's money to "fix" the problem or do we get off our ass and fix it ourselves?

Because have you ever noticed that no matter how much power and money we send these guys to fix problems the problems continue to be problems each campaign?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Libertarians are not anarchists. Like all who are not anarchists, they recognize that there is a place for government, that there are certain functions that are best served by government, and that government legitimately exists to fulfill these functions.

Nonsense. There is no difference between libertarians and anarchists. The honest libertarians at least admit that.

Really? Find me a link to any self-identified Libertarian source of any credibility, which completely denies that there is any legitimate role for government.

From the point of view of an extreme statist, libertarianism may seen like anarchism, but to sane people, there is a clear difference.

FWIW, I do not, myself, identify as a libertarian.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I believe in education for all. Education is at the core of our success as a nation.

I do not agree with the first of the statements above, but I do agree with the second.

I believe in educating all who demonstrate by their mastering the content taught to them that it's worth investing resources to educate them. Obviously, not everyone concurs with me; however, I don't form my views based upon the nature and extent to which others may or do concur with and/or approve of them.

Well education needs to be relevant to those being educated. No point in doing Shakespeare on someone who isn't going to care or understand what it's all about. DO something that makes them want to learn rather than simply saying all should learn Shakespeare because someone else likes it.

 

[whitehall]

Did you care about such things eight freaking years ago or is it an epiphany that left wingers only experience during republican administrations?

 

[BrokeLoser]

Obviously, government plays a useful role...

As far as the "safety net" for the poor (low IQ savages who breed like rabbits), indeed the government played a role in destroying America and Europe. "Safety net" is code word for White Genocide!

Low IQ savages? Look in the mirror, old boy. Nothing you have ever posted indicates more than a two digit IQ. And it is the areas with the universities in them that are the most liberal, while the most 'Conservative' are very rural areas with little education or ambition.

You must be a really smart guy...care to enlighten us a little?
California and New York are full of universities...you agree?
You have made the assertion that these areas are full of educated, ambitions Liberals...right?
Hmmm....I smell fish...I'm sure you can't be stupid and confused...right?

California - 12% of the nations population, 33% of the nations welfare recipients - FACT
By the way Hawaii and New York are fighting CA for that number one spot....are they blue or red states? hahaha
Here you go:
It Looks Like Red States Take Most in Federal 'Welfare' from this Map. But Looks Can Be Deceiving.
California’s Welfare Benefits: Boom or Bust?
"There has been much discussion about immigrants in the United States from everywhere around the world. Yet, why is it that California seems to attract the most immigrants of any state? Indeed, while the state is only 12% of the nation’s population, it is home to 33% of welfare residents. According to a report published by the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) on January 26, 2015, there is a correlation between generous welfare benefits and an increase in immigration.

In total, California outspends every other state in public welfare spending – in 2014, it spent $22.4 billion. In contrast, the next closest state, New York, spent $11.9 billion. That being said, does this make California a magnet for immigrants? Not necessarily. It is more of an anchor – a reason why residents stay for long periods of time in the state. However, to deny that there is no magnet would be incorrect. According to George J. Borjas, the Robert W. Scrivner Professor of Economics and Social Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School and the author of the aforementioned report, the reason as to why people decide to relocate is due to “income-maximizing behavior.” Immigrants have already accepted that there are certain fixed costs that are inevitable because of migration, so it is natural that they will flock towards the places with the highest benefits. Empirical evidence suggests that it is because of these differences that there are an increasingly disproportionate number of immigrants among states. While there is the possibility of alternative explanations for this phenomenon, the conclusion that Borjas draws using the wealth-maximization hypothesis is one such testable method.

However, upon closer examination, on a per-capita basis, California’s seemingly generous benefits pale in data comparison to other states. For example, it spends approximately $179 for every resident, behind $233 in Hawaii and $256 in New York. Furthermore, approximately 8.9% of California residents live in poverty, the highest of any state. Despite this, the number of people immigrating to California increases exponentially each year.

 

[ScienceRocks]

For the gazillionth time, OP, nobody in the real world gives a shit about your I WANT I WANT I WANT entitlement mentality. Your "I WANT" sniveling is no different than a spoiled 8-year-old reciting his Christmas wish-demands for Santa.

LOL Election in 2018. I guess we shall see what the voters think of that list.

The guy wants to take us back to the huntering days when their was No roads, no critical thought, no education and everyone hunted for their own meat and ended up dying in their late 20's or 30's.

This guys below the fucking taliban.

 

[ScienceRocks]

It takes a lot of intelligence to admit that we should educate all of our children, pay for our infrastructure that we all use and demand clean air, water and food.

Most animals expect better then you goddamn archaist.Damn, straight I want!!!! I want to live in a first world country and that cost money and if you don't think so...well, you're an enemy of mine.

 

[Wyatt earp]

It takes a lot of intelligence to admit that we should educate all of our children, pay for our infrastructure that we all use and demand clean air, water and food.

Most animals expect better then you goddamn archaist.Damn, straight I want!!!! I want to live in a first world country and that cost money and if you don't think so...well, you're an enemy of mine.

Yet you want everyone else to pay for it while you sit around and smoke pot


.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

It takes a lot of intelligence to admit that we should educate all of our children, pay for our infrastructure that we all use and demand clean air, water and food.

Most animals expect better then you goddamn archaist.Damn, straight I want!!!! I want to live in a first world country and that cost money and if you don't think so...well, you're an enemy of mine.

Why should I pay for your roads and bridges that I will never use?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I am going to be honest with you....I like some government and living within a first world society.
1. I want good infrastructure that doesn't fall apart as I drive across bridges
2. I want clean water and air...The epa has done a good job these past 40 years. China or India is utterly unacceptable for America.
3. I want clean food and medication. I don't want to live in a nation that looks like Mexico or China for our standards.
4. I believe antitrust is needed to protect the little guy starting up his business from the sharks.
5. I believe in a safetynet for our poor and disabled. That is the moral and right thing to do.
6. I believe in science and advancement into tech....We're cutting edge because we do what the rest of the third world doesn't.
7. I believe in education for all. Education is at the core of our success as a nation.
8. I believe in workers rights and safety standards.

If you think we don't need any of this and it is "want", want, want...Well, maybe you don't belong within a civilized society.

Is this supposed to be news?

You're a nanny state loser. That's common knowledge.

Thread fail

 

[usmbguest5318]

I believe in education for all. Education is at the core of our success as a nation.

I do not agree with the first of the statements above, but I do agree with the second.

I believe in educating all who demonstrate by their mastering the content taught to them that it's worth investing resources to educate them. Obviously, not everyone concurs with me; however, I don't form my views based upon the nature and extent to which others may or do concur with and/or approve of them.

Well education needs to be relevant to those being educated. No point in doing Shakespeare on someone who isn't going to care or understand what it's all about. DO something that makes them want to learn rather than simply saying all should learn Shakespeare because someone else likes it.

No point in doing Shakespeare on someone who isn't going to care or understand what it's all about.

The pedagogical purpose of teaching students at least some of Shakespeare's plays and sonnets (Why Do We Still Care About Shakespeare? | Ovations | UTSA's College of Liberal and Fine Arts Magazine) is only partly about learning Shakespeare for the sake of being familiar with the bard's works. Indeed, as a thing that high school students study, "the play's is only barely the thing." If nothing else, one can build one's vocabulary from reading the Bard.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

It takes a lot of intelligence to admit that we should educate all of our children, pay for our infrastructure that we all use and demand clean air, water and food.

Most animals expect better then you goddamn archaist.Damn, straight I want!!!! I want to live in a first world country and that cost money and if you don't think so...well, you're an enemy of mine.

Actually it doesn't take much if any intelligence to want those things.

FYI: I just looked out my front door and saw a street & sidewalk! You may rest easy you infrastructure warrior, someone acquiesced to your demands!

 

[PoliticalChic]

Obviously, government plays a useful role...

As far as the "safety net" for the poor (low IQ savages who breed like rabbits), indeed the government played a role in destroying America and Europe. "Safety net" is code word for White Genocide!

Low IQ savages? Look in the mirror, old boy. Nothing you have ever posted indicates more than a two digit IQ. And it is the areas with the universities in them that are the most liberal, while the most 'Conservative' are very rural areas with little education or ambition.

You must be a really smart guy...care to enlighten us a little?
California and New York are full of universities...you agree?
You have made the assertion that these areas are full of educated, ambitions Liberals...right?
Hmmm....I smell fish...I'm sure you can't be stupid and confused...right?

California - 12% of the nations population, 33% of the nations welfare recipients - FACT
By the way Hawaii and New York are fighting CA for that number one spot....are they blue or red states? hahaha
Here you go:
It Looks Like Red States Take Most in Federal 'Welfare' from this Map. But Looks Can Be Deceiving.
California’s Welfare Benefits: Boom or Bust?
"There has been much discussion about immigrants in the United States from everywhere around the world. Yet, why is it that California seems to attract the most immigrants of any state? Indeed, while the state is only 12% of the nation’s population, it is home to 33% of welfare residents. According to a report published by the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) on January 26, 2015, there is a correlation between generous welfare benefits and an increase in immigration.

In total, California outspends every other state in public welfare spending – in 2014, it spent $22.4 billion. In contrast, the next closest state, New York, spent $11.9 billion. That being said, does this make California a magnet for immigrants? Not necessarily. It is more of an anchor – a reason why residents stay for long periods of time in the state. However, to deny that there is no magnet would be incorrect. According to George J. Borjas, the Robert W. Scrivner Professor of Economics and Social Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School and the author of the aforementioned report, the reason as to why people decide to relocate is due to “income-maximizing behavior.” Immigrants have already accepted that there are certain fixed costs that are inevitable because of migration, so it is natural that they will flock towards the places with the highest benefits. Empirical evidence suggests that it is because of these differences that there are an increasingly disproportionate number of immigrants among states. While there is the possibility of alternative explanations for this phenomenon, the conclusion that Borjas draws using the wealth-maximization hypothesis is one such testable method.

However, upon closer examination, on a per-capita basis, California’s seemingly generous benefits pale in data comparison to other states. For example, it spends approximately $179 for every resident, behind $233 in Hawaii and $256 in New York. Furthermore, approximately 8.9% of California residents live in poverty, the highest of any state. Despite this, the number of people immigrating to California increases exponentially each year.

Then, there's this:

California: $2,702.3 (in billions of debt)
Compare Debt By State for 2017 - Charts

Hightest debt total in the country.