Callous Conservatives, Time to wake up!

[bedowin62]

it's HILARIOUS REALLY!!!!

Dad2three leaves for a while and you'd think it was becasue he had a bout of common sense...................but back he comes to SPAM THE THREAD with copy and past PROPAGANDA

He's so insecure of his position that he needs to throw up a bunch of shit for people to decipher

 

[bedowin62]

It's time to reject the ignorance and hate common to most on the right; the reactionaryism and fear of change, diversity, and expressions of individual liberty.

It's also time to reject failed conservative fiscal dogma, to instead pursue a pragmatic course predicated on what works, not what conforms to that failed conservative economic dogma.

Yeah, because the loony left's socialist dogma has been such a rousing success.

ONE policy the CONservatives have EVER been on the correct side of US history? Just ONE POLICY?

i named several you dullard

woman's suffrage, slavery...etc

you just ran away and avoided it all................

 

[Dad2three]

Sorry Bubba, I forgot your "graph" beats the Office of the Actuary, an independent office within the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services that says YOU ARE FULL OF SHIT.

Yep, the SOUTHERN CONservatives States of AmeriKKKa is where those CONservative KKK came from. WE call them GOPers today

The graph is from the US Government Bureau of Economic Analysis, you stupid demoKKKrat.

What you(or KOS) did was cut off at 2013, to hide the massive spike.

Hey, you're just a lying Commie.

Study: Health Care Spending to Increase in 2015 After 5-Year Slump

Total expenditure driven by rising costs of specialty drugs and an improving economy, PwC report says.

Study: Health Care Spending to Increase in 2015 After 5-Year Slump

 

[bedowin62]

Sorry Bubba, I forgot your "graph" beats the Office of the Actuary, an independent office within the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services that says YOU ARE FULL OF SHIT.

Yep, the SOUTHERN CONservatives States of AmeriKKKa is where those CONservative KKK came from. WE call them GOPers today

The graph is from the US Government Bureau of Economic Analysis, you stupid demoKKKrat.

What you(or KOS) did was cut off at 2013, to hide the massive spike.

Hey, you're just a lying Commie.

Study: Health Care Spending to Increase in 2015 After 5-Year Slump

Total expenditure driven by rising costs of specialty drugs and an improving economy, PwC report says.

Study: Health Care Spending to Increase in 2015 After 5-Year Slump

youre admitting they are about to again rise FASTER then they HAVE BEEN. thanks for the honesty genius

 

[Dad2three]

Taking the OP's thread title apparently conservatives, which I presume means Republicans to the village idiot, Republicans (reds) are being callous to the poor. The poor, to believe the village idiot, are living in red states. Therefore, we are callous to ourselves.

True

 

[bedowin62]

Red states are getting richer; Blue states are getting poorer

amazing how backward and behind the curve the "forward" people are!!

 

[bedowin62]

1000 People a Day: Why Red States Are Getting Richer and ...
www.rightsidenews.com/.../1-000-people-a-day-why-red-states-are-getti...

• Cached

1,000 People a Day: Why Red States Are Getting Richer and Blue States Poorer ... tax rates on the rich, generous welfare benefits, forced-union requirements, ...

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Tripled huh? Capping max profits to 20% is triple? lol

Cost to consumers sploogy, you are attempting to mix terms.

Hey, you're a leftist, you lie, it's what you do.

Now let's talk about the massive profits that democrats have reaped from Fascist Care?

HINT, Google your right wing liar COMMENTARY Bubba. He's ALMOST as big a liar as you are Bubs

Meth is not your friend, Dumb2Three.

{The ACA was written to supposedly address this crisis, not by changing it, but by making it a law, ensuring even more profits for the health care industry, which spent over 380 million dollars to support the ACA.

Actually the law was written to make more slaves out of free people. Thanks to Commie Care, we now have over 11 million more people that are now government dependents. It was the only goal all along.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Sorry Bubba, I forgot your "graph" beats the Office of the Actuary, an independent office within the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services that says YOU ARE FULL OF SHIT.

Yep, the SOUTHERN CONservatives States of AmeriKKKa is where those CONservative KKK came from. WE call them GOPers today

The graph is from the US Government Bureau of Economic Analysis, you stupid demoKKKrat.

What you(or KOS) did was cut off at 2013, to hide the massive spike.

Hey, you're just a lying Commie.

Study: Health Care Spending to Increase in 2015 After 5-Year Slump

Total expenditure driven by rising costs of specialty drugs and an improving economy, PwC report says.

Study: Health Care Spending to Increase in 2015 After 5-Year Slump

LOL, how disingenuous. That graph shows very high increases. It's formatted to hide that, but the spending growth is 9% to 7%

http://blogs-images.forbes.com/mike...ealth-Ins-Prems-Personal-Income-2005-2014.jpg

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

And yet the idiots think lowering the taxes on the corps some more will do anything? hahahaha,,,,

We can't compete with slave labor in asia...period...

Raise their taxes, put up tariffs, raise minimum wage and make the little business be able to get into the market by reestablishing monopoly busting as we did in the early 20th century...All this would help the guy that is being paid a little better open up a business and have a chance within that market place.

Good plan. And when consumer goods increase dramatically, people will just have to buy less and less. Less disposable income at the end of the month as well. That will have a nice impact on our economy.

 

[Wry Catcher]

It's time to reject the ignorance and hate common to most on the right; the reactionaryism and fear of change, diversity, and expressions of individual liberty.

It's also time to reject failed conservative fiscal dogma, to instead pursue a pragmatic course predicated on what works, not what conforms to that failed conservative economic dogma.

Yeah, because the loony left's socialist dogma has been such a rousing success.

Please define the "loony left's socialist dogma".

 

[TemplarKormac]

It's time to reject the ignorance and hate common to most on the right; the reactionaryism and fear of change, diversity, and expressions of individual liberty.

It's also time to reject failed conservative fiscal dogma, to instead pursue a pragmatic course predicated on what works, not what conforms to that failed conservative economic dogma.

Yeah, because the loony left's socialist dogma has been such a rousing success.

Please define the "loony left's socialist dogma".

You.

 

[TemplarKormac]

It's no wonder you can't get a job, few employers want to hire assholes.

Now, I wonder what that had to do with my argument or yours? Well? What do you care about employment? Wouldn't you rather me be on government assistance instead, like a good American should?

You moron.

 

[bripat9643]

you lack a common basic characteristic of the human species, empathy.

I have plenty of it. My empathy tells me that people should prosper, not live under the weight of government. If you truly had any empathy unique to this human species, you would give these people jobs, make their path to employment easier. Yet here you are demanding a "living wage." That only complicates matters because you lack empathy for those who have to make a living, just as people like you do, those who run those small mom and pop business, the small business owners. Not all of them are rich tycoons or magnates, they fight the same fight you do. Now, here you are wanting to penalize them for their success.

Then again, what good is a living wage if nobody's around to pay it --- or receive it? "Living wage" will hurt employers ability to employ people. It will hurt those employees laid off because of it. People on welfare or food stamps won't be there to earn it, because they're sucklings on the government teat. You defend both, but don't have the solution to either.

My oh my, what a little Pandora's box we have here.

What happens when you put the business owners out on the street huh? Where will your "living wage" be then? Your quest to bridge the gap in income will only be Pyrrhic in nature. You're given to ignore the ones you knocked off the bridge in order to get to the other side.

Government assistance only goes so far. Sometimes you have to stand up on your own two feet. But that's something I gather you'll have none of, am I correct?

On one side, you have "living wage" on the other you have "entitlements." You fight that counterproductive fight. How can you be for both if one is like a poison to the other?

Good grief. That you believe income inequality is okay and government has no role in social policy is, in a word, nuts.

So you think anything aside from absolutely equal incomes is some kind of crime against humanity? How has that worked out whenever it was tried?

Where in the Constitution does it say the federal government has the authority to control society?

 

[Wry Catcher]

It's no wonder you can't get a job, few employers want to hire assholes.

Now, I wonder what that had to do with my argument or yours? Well? What do you care about employment? Wouldn't you rather me be on government assistance instead, like a good American should?

You moron.

LOL, Yep, you are an asshole, and I'll explain one reason why. You failed (lied by omissiion) tp put my comment in context. If one reads post 247 they'll understand. Short of that, here's the germane part:
.
You: "I didn't ask for something I learned about in high school, I asked for a fixed, definite number. Or are you incapable of counting past the number 10?"

Me: It's no wonder you can't get a job, few employers want to hire assholes."

 

[TemplarKormac]

LOL, Yep, you are an asshole, and I'll explain one reason why. You failed (lied by omissiion) tp put my comment in context. If one reads post 247 they'll understand. Short of that, here's the germane part:
.
You: "I didn't ask for something I learned about in high school, I asked for a fixed, definite number. Or are you incapable of counting past the number 10?"

Me: It's no wonder you can't get a job, few employers want to hire assholes."

You somehow think me putting your post "in context" makes what you said any different.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Raising the minimum wage, receiving a living wages, having health insurance and enough to save for the future are the unmet dreams of too many in America, and providing these meager things won't make it harder for those of us who play on our computers for hours each day

No, that is asking government to live our lives for us. We rise and fall on our own merits, our own circumstances. It isn't government's place to change those circumstances. Government cannot play God, nor can it alter the human condition.

What exactly is a "living wage" anyway? Isn't that nothing more than a buzzword? How do you define a "living wage?" What's the limit, Wry? How high must you go before you'll call it a "living wage?"

High enough perhaps that you force business to cut workers to keep in the black? Is it such that it is enough to compel a global food franchise to resort to automation to serve its customers?

You want people to live on reasonable wages, yet, I sense you have no idea what's reasonable, now do you?

A living wage is one which provides enough income to take care of basic needs: food, clothing, shelter, health care and some left over to save/invest for retirement.

See number 1 on Maslow's hierarchy of needs, and think about all five on the list:

http://www.simplypsychology.org/maslow.html

I didn't ask for something I learned about in high school, I asked for a fixed, definite number. Or are you incapable of counting past the number 10?

You're missing the point. A "living wage" is not a "fixed, definite" number, it's an abstract number, dependent on many additional variables. A living wage in San Francisco is not the same as a living wage in Modesto, and a living wage for a person supporting 4 kids is different than the living wage for a single person with no family.

The term is usually defined to mean the hourly rate an individual must earn to support their family, as the sole provider, assuming full-time employment.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Cut, slash, burn and deregulate is stupid. Period.

End of story.

 

[Wry Catcher]

It's no wonder you can't get a job, few employers want to hire assholes.

Now, I wonder what that had to do with my argument or yours? Well? What do you care about employment? Wouldn't you rather me be on government assistance instead, like a good American should?

You moron.

LOL, nice rebuttal, Didn't you write a bit earlier that you couldn't get a job?

 

[TemplarKormac]

A "living wage" is not a "fixed, definite" number, it's an abstract number, dependent on many additional variables

I know that, Doc.

Those variables make a "living wage" impossible to obtain. A "living wage" one day isn't "living wage" the next. The term "living wage" is too absolute a term. I figured since people were demanding $15 an hour, that this would be considered a "living wage" to someone such as Wry. But its not.

It is a term driven by sheer cupidity, nothing more. The definition of the term constantly changes, to mean "more."

The term is usually defined to mean the hourly rate an individual must earn to support their family, as the sole provider, assuming full-time employment.

Like I said. Too absolute. But my issue is with able bodied individuals on government assistance who don't earn this "living wage." Welfare checks cannot support a full family on its own. Either they supplement that with a part time job, or they live in government funded housing, and in some cases abject poverty until need drives them to find meaningful employment.