Why NOTHING should be free

[P@triot]

to benefit all of us

Ah yes, the ignorant battle cry of the idiot communist. You know what would "benefit us ALL", asshole? Ending the dependent parasites like you. Forcing you parasites to get up off of your lazy ass and provide for yourselves.

 

[Old Rocks]

These teabaggers think Scrooge was a hero.

And you idiot liberal Dumbocrats think that Vladamir Lenin, Joseph Stalin, and Adolf Hitler are "hero's". They controlled wealth. They controlled food supply. They controlled healthcare (you know, all of the things you parasites want). It ended with hundres of millions slaughtered and everyone living in misery.

I'll take the fictional Scrooge over the actual tyrants that you worship and emulate any day....

Dumb fuck. You want your ideal world? Move to Somalia or some other Godforsaken shit hole where everyone does just for themselves. See how long you last in those circumstances. A wimp like you would have their throat cut on the first day.

 

[Old Rocks]

to benefit all of us

Ah yes, the ignorant battle cry of the idiot communist. You know what would "benefit us ALL", asshole? Ending the dependent parasites like you. Forcing you parasites to get up off of your lazy ass and provide for yourselves.

Stupid ass. It is the red states and people like you that we hard working liberals have to support. We shoulder our responsibilities, while you people pump out kids like a bunch of rabbits, and have no way to support them.

Red Families Vs. Blue Families : NPR

There's a family-values divide between red states and blue states, two researchers say, but the differences might surprise people on both sides of the political spectrum. The states that voted Democratic in the last two presidential elections have the lowest rates of divorce and teen pregnancies. And the red states had the highest. One of those researchers, June Carbone of the University of Missouri-Kansas City, tells host Guy Raz what she thinks is the deciding factor: Women in blue states wait later to get married and have kids.

 

[P@triot]

These teabaggers think Scrooge was a hero.

To bad the dems don't have the same feeling toward Jesus Christ.

I see. Then Jesus Christ was a Republican that stated, "Let the hungry starve, don't you dare provide help in any way to the poor"?

More propaganda from the assholes on the left. Tell me, where in the bible does Jesus tell people that government should take by force and redistribute to the parasites who refuse to work and provide for themselves?

Like all idiot liberal Dumbocrats who reject God, you've never read the bibile, yet you're all too happy to comment on it (thus exposing your ignorance).

By the way, the US leads the world in charity while also leading the world in corporate taxes. Just imagine how much how much work we could do in Jesus name if you idiot liberal Dumbocrat communists weren't stealing our money and wasting it on narcotics, pornograpy, gambling, and more narcotics.

 

[P@triot]

to benefit all of us

Ah yes, the ignorant battle cry of the idiot communist. You know what would "benefit us ALL", asshole? Ending the dependent parasites like you. Forcing you parasites to get up off of your lazy ass and provide for yourselves.

Stupid ass. It is the red states and people like you that we hard working liberals have to support. We shoulder our responsibilities, while you people pump out kids like a bunch of rabbits, and have no way to support them.

Red Families Vs. Blue Families : NPR

There's a family-values divide between red states and blue states, two researchers say, but the differences might surprise people on both sides of the political spectrum. The states that voted Democratic in the last two presidential elections have the lowest rates of divorce and teen pregnancies. And the red states had the highest. One of those researchers, June Carbone of the University of Missouri-Kansas City, tells host Guy Raz what she thinks is the deciding factor: Women in blue states wait later to get married and have kids.

Yep, just keeping sucking down the propaganda like you do other men, asshole. If you were doing all of the providing, you wouldn't be screaming for more providing asshole.

 

[P@triot]

These teabaggers think Scrooge was a hero.

And you idiot liberal Dumbocrats think that Vladamir Lenin, Joseph Stalin, and Adolf Hitler are "hero's". They controlled wealth. They controlled food supply. They controlled healthcare (you know, all of the things you parasites want). It ended with hundres of millions slaughtered and everyone living in misery.

I'll take the fictional Scrooge over the actual tyrants that you worship and emulate any day....

Dumb fuck. You want your ideal world? Move to Somalia or some other Godforsaken shit hole where everyone does just for themselves. See how long you last in those circumstances. A wimp like you would have their throat cut on the first day.

A little angry? Yeah, that happens when you expose the ignorance in the idiot liberal Dumbocrat ideology

Dumb fuck, you want your ideal world? Cuba is waiting for you. Everyone is equally living in poverty. And the weather is nice I hear. So you're all out of excuses asshole.

 

[P@triot]

Well GOPer's and other RW's, you can take solice in knowing that the sun, and the air we breath are free.

Not if the idiot liberal Dumbocrats have their way. That would be a very funny joke, except it's actually true.

Three words: CAP AND TRADE

 

[P@triot]

What will it take to get the idiot liberal Dumbocrat to understand that nothing is "free". When someone gets food stamps, someone else is forced to provide it. When someone gets subsidized housing, someone else is forced to provide it. When someone gets free healthcare, someone else is forced to provide it.

When one labors and the fruits of those labor are given to another by force, there is a term for that - it's called SLAVERY. Leave it to the Dumbocrats to advocate slavery.

It begs the question though: why does the idiot liberal Dumbocrat advocate for free everything except the market?!?!

Freedom aint free, and it's called taxes. Now to make the wealthy cough up their fair share and then tackle economical issues, so we can take people off the food stamps.

Bitching about taxes because it isn't "free" is the most idiotic thing I've seen all week, but then again, Republicans like to avoid taxes. Just look at mittens.

Freedom is called taxes? Really? Not sure the folks that founded our nation would agree with that "pearl of wisdom", Nitroz.

Here's a novel concept...before we have the wealthy cough up more for their "fair share"...don't you think it might make more sense to get our fiscal house in order with what we are spending? I mean, I hate to point out the OBVIOUS here but if we were to seize all of the income that the wealthy created, it STILL wouldn't come close to paying for the entitlements that we've obligated ourselves to. Given that fact I'm kind of baffled by your belief that if we can just squeeze a bit more money out of the wealthy that we can "fix" things. Explain to me just how that works...

Come on now Oldstyle, you can't use LOGIC when talking with the idiot liberal Dumbocrat. That's beyond their mental capacity. They only understand propaganda and WWF-style "Hope & Change" hype screamed over a microphone...

 

[Katzndogz]

Dumbocrats are happy to help, as long as they can do it with someone else's money.

 

[P@triot]

Well GOPer's and other RW's, you can take solice in knowing that the sun, and the air we breath are free.

Democrats will find a way to tax them.

They already have - it's called the CAP AND TRADE scam. Just another way for them to redistribute wealth without calling it communism.

 

[Murf76]

What will it take to get the idiot liberal Dumbocrat to understand that nothing is "free". When someone gets food stamps, someone else is forced to provide it. When someone gets subsidized housing, someone else is forced to provide it. When someone gets free healthcare, someone else is forced to provide it.

When one labors and the fruits of those labor are given to another by force, there is a term for that - it's called SLAVERY. Leave it to the Dumbocrats to advocate slavery.

It begs the question though: why does the idiot liberal Dumbocrat advocate for free everything except the market?!?!

While you're absolutely correct that "nothing is free", I do think that it's constitutionally appropriate for STATES to provide whatever welfare services they deem appropriate. What ends up running away with us are FEDERAL programs. Even if it weren't for the fact that they're not constitutionally valid, and I don't believe that they are regardless of any previous SC rulings... there's no way to limit them.

Welfare programs at the State level are subject to market forces. Their growth is limited organically. Because States don't have printing presses in order to create more dollars, and most do have balanced budget amendments to their constitutions, they have little choice but to limit the size and scope of welfare programs to what they can afford. What's more, is they are subject to competition from other States for revenue dollars, each needing to attract businesses and citizens. That necessitates balance between appropriate taxation and public services. If you allow the taxes to climb too high, producers leave. If you allow the infrastructure to crumble, producers leave. If you allow blight and poverty with poor schools, homelessness, and criminality, producers leave. Reaching the right balance is crucial to keeping a steady revenue pool. And at the State level, sure... we'll have some doing it better than others, but no one state will sink the rest.

What this country truly needs most is to limit the size and scope of FEDERAL government. We need to be following the U.S. Constitution as it was meant to be. We need to undo the many depredations upon it which have given unintended powers to the federal government.

 

[Murf76]

And you idiot liberal Dumbocrats think that Vladamir Lenin, Joseph Stalin, and Adolf Hitler are "hero's". They controlled wealth. They controlled food supply. They controlled healthcare (you know, all of the things you parasites want). It ended with hundres of millions slaughtered and everyone living in misery.

I'll take the fictional Scrooge over the actual tyrants that you worship and emulate any day....

Dumb fuck. You want your ideal world? Move to Somalia or some other Godforsaken shit hole where everyone does just for themselves. See how long you last in those circumstances. A wimp like you would have their throat cut on the first day.

A little angry? Yeah, that happens when you expose the ignorance in the idiot liberal Dumbocrat ideology

Dumb fuck, you want your ideal world? Cuba is waiting for you. Everyone is equally living in poverty. And the weather is nice I hear. So you're all out of excuses asshole.

Well... not everyone. What communists never seem to remember as they busily attempt to eliminate economic class, is that they're simply exchanging one kind of wealthy class for another. Rather than a wealthy merchant class, you end up with a wealthy political class.

In the U.S., we are equal in terms of the value of our citizenship under the law. But that kind of equality doesn't guarantee results in outcome. As human beings, we vary in our strengths and talents, and those with more innate gifts typically achieve better results. But that's human nature. It's unchanging. There's never going to be a situation in which economic activity becomes egalitarian. Some will always have more, others less. There will always be a "wealthy class". The question is really about who will be in it. Earners or politicians.

 

[uscitizen]

1. How is a baby that was going to be aborted going to be raised ( sorry the non-profits can not handle the huge amount it takes ) I have worked in this field.

The non-profits absolutely can handle it. First of all, the families standing in line waiting to adopt are miles long. Second, we have the highest corporate tax rate in the world, yet we also give more to charity than any nation in the world. Can you imagine how much charity would receieve if the Dumbocrats weren't stealing us into poverty?

2. If a family goes through a really hard time, don't you feel that a family deserves food and shelter for a short time?

Yes, from their family. From their friends. From their neighbors. From their church. From their charities. That's more than enough safety nets. Why the fuck does the left insist that everything be done through government - which is full of waste and corruption.

3. When a non-insured person gets into a horrible accident, you feel that they should just die ?

Why does the left have to be so extreme? It's either slavery or death in your mind? Really? There is no other choice? How about this? When an uninsured person gets into a horrible accident, they are held accountable for being uninsured. They are put on a payment plan (just like people who buy homes, cars, property, college loans, etc.) and forced to pay back the cost of their mistake, even if it takes the rest of their life. Personal responsibility and accountability. What a concept, uh?

I could go on

I could too, but I just thoroughly defeated every weak point you just made. I eagerly await any more you might have.

"

The non-profits absolutely can handle it. First of all, the families standing in line waiting to adopt are miles long. Second, we have the highest corporate tax rate in the world, yet we also give more to charity than any nation in the world. Can you imagine how much charity would receieve if the Dumbocrats weren't stealing us into poverty?"

Can you imagine how charity contributions would fall if the high tax rates did not engourage charitable contribution deductions?

 

[Londoner]

The OP is at it again. He is listening to talk radio.

The American private sector has been given more subsidies and bailouts than the citizenry has seen in welfare payments by an unimaginable factor.

My brother-in-law is a lobbyist. The point of becoming a large corporation is to have enough money to lobby Washington for access to the tax payer's wallet.

The OP understands none of this.

During the largest fiscal crisis in the last 70 years, the wealthy were bailed out with TARP and the poor were foreclosed upon.

This is how welfare works. It always goes to those on top.

 

[Murf76]

The OP is at it again. He is listening to talk radio.

The American private sector has been given more subsidies and bailouts than the citizenry has seen in welfare payments by an unimaginable factor.

My brother-in-law is a lobbyist. The point of becoming a large corporation is to have enough money to lobby Washington for access to the tax payer's wallet.

The OP understands none of this.

During the largest fiscal crisis in the last 70 years, the wealthy were bailed out with TARP and the poor were foreclosed upon.

This is how welfare works. It always goes to those on top.

A swing and a miss. TARP has been repaid, at a profit no less, by the banks. It's the money we put out to GM and Chrysler that's not coming back. And entitlement programs eat up two-thirds of our federal budget, meaning that any dollar which can be appropriated by Congress for spending can only come from the remaining one-third.

 

[rightwinger]

to benefit all of us

Ah yes, the ignorant battle cry of the idiot communist. You know what would "benefit us ALL", asshole? Ending the dependent parasites like you. Forcing you parasites to get up off of your lazy ass and provide for yourselves.

What do you think should be the fate of dependent parasites in this country?

Living in cardboard boxes? Dumster diving for food? Going from door to door asking for handouts? Dying in the streets for lack of medical care?

Is this your view of America?

 

[Londoner]

A swing and a miss. TARP has been repaid, at a profit no less, by the banks. It's the money we put out to GM and Chrysler that's not coming back. And entitlement programs eat up two-thirds of our federal budget, meaning that any dollar which can be appropriated by Congress for spending can only come from the remaining one-third.

Of course it will be paid back, especially if you believe government accounting, and especially when you realize that many of the bailed out financial institutions get practically free Fed money to loan out. But that isn't the point. The point is how the money was used - to help Wall Street recapitalize and sustain it's system of bonuses-for-bad-risk-takers rather than moving the money into the wider economy. This isn't partisan. The fact that Ryan and the Tea Party are against TARP when they need to foment hatred against government is funny and odd, given that other parts of the Right support it. One of the largest culprits for making sure the policy benefited the banks to the exclusion of homeowners is Obama's Geithner (who, because he works for Obama, is supposed to be a socialists who robs from the private sector banks and gives to the poor. Right?)

But I agree with you. It is crucial to recognize that the private sector needs Big Government bailouts. And it needs (craves) Big Government FDIC insurance. I wrote part of my thesis on how global capital flows into the USA pharmaceutical R&D. The reason being the Big Government Patent system which protects those investments. Some countries lack such a powerful patent system where big government protects your product from market competitors. Point is: John Galt loves the protection and help he gets from Big Government. He lobby like a sonofabitch for all da help he'z can git. He loves taking risks when he has a big government safety net. Milton Friedman preaches against ANY government help, subsidies, patents, regulations and bailouts in order to make everyone feel like they're practicing that ol' time free market religion, but every time you poke behind the curtain you see ol' Johnny Galt with his hand in the cookie jar, soaking up that big brother love.

Monday on "CBS This Morning," Barofsky said, "They captured regulators' ideology. ... What I saw with TARP, is that it went from a program that was supposed to help Main Street - reinvigorate the economy, restart lending and help struggling homeowners - turn into a program that really only served the financial elites on Wall Street."

Though Barofsky says TARP deserves credit for stopping the financial collapse of the U.S. economy, he said the program was intended to do more.

"When you think about it, throwing a few hundred billion dollars at the largest banks and trillions of dollars of other support just to preserve what is essentially a broken status quo that benefits really the financial executives, ... wouldn't be that impressive," Barofsky said.

"That's why Congress insisted and Treasury promised more, that the banks would take this money and use it to deploy it into the economy and bring back economic growth, which hasn't happened because of the way it was mismanaged. They promised -- and TARP doesn't get passed but for the promise to help struggling homeowners and the foreclosure crisis. Democrats in Congress are not going to pass that bill without that promise. And that promise was abandoned. And the reason why is, again, the interests of the bank were always put first."

Barofsky says Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, in particular, is to blame for the mishandling of TARP. "Among other things, he presided over, made the policy choices to put the banks before homeowners. He oversaw a policy that saw our largest banks, the too-big-to-fail institutions get bigger than ever and more powerful, more politically connected. ... Where we are in the economy today is partly the responsibility of Secretary Geithner and the bad policy choices that he has made."

 

[naturegirl]

I have always worked very hard for a living, and never expected a dime from another.

I too disagree with giving free hand outs... but let me ask you a few questions.

1. How is a baby that was going to be aborted going to be raised ( sorry the non-profits can not handle the huge amount it takes ) I have worked in this field.

2. If a family goes through a really hard time, don't you feel that a family deserves food and shelter for a short time?

3. When a non-insured person gets into a horrible accident, you feel that they should just die ?

I could go on

he'd rather we had debtors prisons and workhouses like dickensian england.

Funny we don't have debtor's prisons except for the IRS. The government can put you in jail for not paying taxes but you can't go to jail for not paying your bills. Do you agree it's OK for the government to have debtor's prison??

 

[rightwinger]

I have always worked very hard for a living, and never expected a dime from another.

I too disagree with giving free hand outs... but let me ask you a few questions.

1. How is a baby that was going to be aborted going to be raised ( sorry the non-profits can not handle the huge amount it takes ) I have worked in this field.

2. If a family goes through a really hard time, don't you feel that a family deserves food and shelter for a short time?

3. When a non-insured person gets into a horrible accident, you feel that they should just die ?

I could go on

he'd rather we had debtors prisons and workhouses like dickensian england.

Funny we don't have debtor's prisons except for the IRS. The government can put you in jail for not paying taxes but you can't go to jail for not paying your bills. Do you agree it's OK for the government to have debtor's prison??

The majority of the people filling our prisons are because of our archaic War on Drugs laws

 

[Murf76]

A swing and a miss. TARP has been repaid, at a profit no less, by the banks. It's the money we put out to GM and Chrysler that's not coming back. And entitlement programs eat up two-thirds of our federal budget, meaning that any dollar which can be appropriated by Congress for spending can only come from the remaining one-third.

Of course it will be paid back, especially if you believe government accounting, and especially when you realize that many of the bailed out financial institutions get practically free Fed money to loan out. But that isn't the point. The point is how the money was used - to help Wall Street recapitalize and sustain it's system of bonuses-for-bad-risk-takers rather than moving the money into the wider economy. This isn't partisan. The fact that Ryan and the Tea Party are against TARP when they need to foment hatred against government is funny and odd, given that other parts of the Right support it. One of the largest culprits for making sure the policy benefited the banks to the exclusion of homeowners is Obama's Geithner (who, because he works for Obama, is supposed to be a socialists who robs from the private sector banks and gives to the poor. Right?)

But I agree with you. It is crucial to recognize that the private sector needs Big Government bailouts. And it needs (craves) Big Government FDIC insurance. I wrote part of my thesis on how global capital flows into the USA pharmaceutical R&D. The reason being the Big Government Patent system which protects those investments. Some countries lack such a powerful patent system where big government protects your product from market competitors. Point is: John Galt loves the protection and help he gets from Big Government. He lobby like a sonofabitch for all da help he'z can git. He loves taking risks when he has a big government safety net. Milton Friedman preaches against ANY government help, subsidies, patents, regulations and bailouts in order to make everyone feel like they're practicing that ol' time free market religion, but every time you poke behind the curtain you see ol' Johnny Galt with his hand in the cookie jar, soaking up that big brother love.

Monday on "CBS This Morning," Barofsky said, "They captured regulators' ideology. ... What I saw with TARP, is that it went from a program that was supposed to help Main Street - reinvigorate the economy, restart lending and help struggling homeowners - turn into a program that really only served the financial elites on Wall Street."

Though Barofsky says TARP deserves credit for stopping the financial collapse of the U.S. economy, he said the program was intended to do more.

"When you think about it, throwing a few hundred billion dollars at the largest banks and trillions of dollars of other support just to preserve what is essentially a broken status quo that benefits really the financial executives, ... wouldn't be that impressive," Barofsky said.

"That's why Congress insisted and Treasury promised more, that the banks would take this money and use it to deploy it into the economy and bring back economic growth, which hasn't happened because of the way it was mismanaged. They promised -- and TARP doesn't get passed but for the promise to help struggling homeowners and the foreclosure crisis. Democrats in Congress are not going to pass that bill without that promise. And that promise was abandoned. And the reason why is, again, the interests of the bank were always put first."

Barofsky says Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, in particular, is to blame for the mishandling of TARP. "Among other things, he presided over, made the policy choices to put the banks before homeowners. He oversaw a policy that saw our largest banks, the too-big-to-fail institutions get bigger than ever and more powerful, more politically connected. ... Where we are in the economy today is partly the responsibility of Secretary Geithner and the bad policy choices that he has made."

The banks have already paid it back, with interest. What's more, there were some, like BB&T, which were already well capitalized, in no danger whatsoever, and were forced to not only take those loans, but to pay them back and tolerate the same kind of government interference as the bad players. Meanwhile back at the ranch.. the worst case of cronyism is exemplified by the GM/Chrysler bailout that Obama and Democrats are touting on the campaign trail, when they set aside traditional laws regarding bankruptcy in order to bail out the UAW.

And of course... NOTHING has been done to control the spiraling costs of our entitlement system. Instead, they added another gargantuan program, which to date is expected to cost THREE TIMES more than they said it would.

Yeah... there's some partisan problems there.