Democrats...please explain how you think you can “have it all”?

[BrokeLoser]

At least finding good workers is not an issue in the us since there is a huge surp!us of hard working people.

At least finding good workers is not an issue in the us since there is a huge surp!us of hard working people.

From Mexico

That's weird....all the "hard working" people I know are able to support themselves and their families without stealing from REAL Americans.

 

[francoHFW]

The top 10% are taking 90% of all the wealth and destroying our fucking middle class. Explain to me why it is ok for them to suck this country dry and how that is good for people that work hard every fucking day.

Actually the top 1% are taking 98%....

No reason to worry

The Trump tax cuts will disappear just like the Bush tax cuts

His wall will be bulldozed just as soon as Democrats take back power

You might be right. I mean after all, the Democrats are more for the non-Americans than they are the Americans.

Actually, dupe, Democrats tried to end illegal immigration in 2010. The GOP will keep it going forever.

Bullshit they did. Why didn't they end it in 2009 when they had total control over the government?

Talk about dupes. You don't even understand what the commie party is up to. They stopped Kate's law, they are fighting tooth and nail for their sanctuary cities, they are now creating sanctuary states, they shut down the government on behalf of illegals, they refuse to allow the wall to be built, Piglosi almost drove herself to a stroke by yapping for 8 hours on behalf of illegals, and you're stupid enough to believe they actually want illegals stopped? Amazing.

If I ever tried to sell anybody a bridge, I would make sure they were a Democrat, because Democrats will believe anything you tell them.

2010 Democratic immigration bill gave amnesty to worthy immigrants and had a SS ID card that would end illegal immigration. Of Of course you know nothing about it, Duke. Democrats had 35 days of control and used it all on ACA. Nobody expected Scott Brown.

What bull you blind bat. Amnesty would have been one of many if up to Democrats. That wouldn't' have ended illegal immigration, it would have only given Democrats more voters in the future. Man do they have the wool pulled over your eyes.

Of course an SS ID card that can't be faked would stop it. But of course that would be communist, right, silly Dupe?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

How does one TAKE something they own, something they created from them self?
It’s the poor, the lower class and illegal wetbacks destroying the middle class....too many takers bottom feeding.
How do people creating the wealth “suck the country dry”.
Holy shit this is getting good.

They didn't create the wealth

Workers generate wealth........the rich just keep most of it

Oh really? Then why don't the workers start their own company and keep "their wealth" themselves?

Because you can't have 150 million companies

But it is the worker producing the wealth. The employer just determines his margin

No, you don't understand......

Wealth is created by using capital and investing it with hopes of making a profit. Workers don't invest anything. They just work. Capitalists invest so it is they who create the profit and wealth--not the worker.

Capitalists are rewarded by their work and investment. Workers are rewarded with an hourly pay, salary, or commission. They don't create wealth.

If you ever invested in the stock market and made a profit, your broker didn't make the profit--you did. If you made a profit in real estate, your real estate agent didn't make the profit--you made the profit. If you started your own lawn care company, the people who manufactured the lawnmowers you use didn't make the profit for your company--you made the profit.

See how it works now?

Workers used to make enough to save and start businesses so 70% of new jobs came from them. No more... Great job, new b******* GOP and silly dupes.

Right, it's just impossible. But foreigners do it all the time. They come here, work 80 hours a week, save and eventually open up their own store or buy into a franchise. But Americans don't make enough to do that because of the GOP.

Do you know anything about politics???

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The top 10% are taking 90% of all the wealth and destroying our fucking middle class. Explain to me why it is ok for them to suck this country dry and how that is good for people that work hard every fucking day.

Actually the top 1% are taking 98%....

You might be right. I mean after all, the Democrats are more for the non-Americans than they are the Americans.

Actually, dupe, Democrats tried to end illegal immigration in 2010. The GOP will keep it going forever.

Bullshit they did. Why didn't they end it in 2009 when they had total control over the government?

Talk about dupes. You don't even understand what the commie party is up to. They stopped Kate's law, they are fighting tooth and nail for their sanctuary cities, they are now creating sanctuary states, they shut down the government on behalf of illegals, they refuse to allow the wall to be built, Piglosi almost drove herself to a stroke by yapping for 8 hours on behalf of illegals, and you're stupid enough to believe they actually want illegals stopped? Amazing.

If I ever tried to sell anybody a bridge, I would make sure they were a Democrat, because Democrats will believe anything you tell them.

2010 Democratic immigration bill gave amnesty to worthy immigrants and had a SS ID card that would end illegal immigration. Of Of course you know nothing about it, Duke. Democrats had 35 days of control and used it all on ACA. Nobody expected Scott Brown.

What bull you blind bat. Amnesty would have been one of many if up to Democrats. That wouldn't' have ended illegal immigration, it would have only given Democrats more voters in the future. Man do they have the wool pulled over your eyes.

Of course and SS ID card that can't be fake wood stop it. But of course that would be communist right, silly Dupe.

How would a stupid Fn card stop illegals? Would an SS card build a wall? Would an SS card put more border patrols up there? Would an SS card stop people from coming here and having anchor babies and then use our welfare systems to support those kids?

They would have kept coming here with the blessing from the Democrats. They screwed Reagan years ago, but we learned our lesson when it comes to trusting lying Democrats.

 

[francoHFW]

At least finding good workers is not an issue in the us since there is a huge surp!us of hard working people.

At least finding good workers is not an issue in the us since there is a huge surp!us of hard working people.

From Mexico

That's weird....all the "hard working" people I know are able to support themselves and their families without stealing from REAL Americans.

A lot more barely now duh... Can you spot when it all went to hell, dingbat?


The Demise of the American Middle Class In Numbers.

Over the past 35 years the American dream has gradually disappeared. The process was slow, so most people didn’t notice. They just worked a few more hours, borrowed a little more and cut back on non-essentials. But looking at the numbers and comparing them over long time periods, it is obvious that things have changed drastically. Here are the details:

1. WORKERS PRODUCE MORE BUT THE GAINS GO TO BUSINESS.

Over the past 63 years worker productivity has grown by 2.0% per year.

But after 1980, workers received a smaller share every year. Labor’s share of income (1992 = 100%):

1950 = 101%
1960 = 105%
1970 = 105%
1980 = 105% – Reagan
1990 = 100%
2000 = 96%
2007 = 92%

A 13% drop since 1980

2. THE TOP 10% GET A LARGER SHARE.

Share of National Income going to Top 10%:

1950 = 35%
1960 = 34%
1970 = 34%
1980 = 34% – Reagan
1990 = 40%
2000 = 47%
2007 = 50%

An increase of 16% since Reagan.

3. WORKERS COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF INCOME BY SPENDING THEIR SAVINGS.

The savings Rose up to Reagan and fell during and after.

1950 = 6.0%
1960 = 7.0%
1970 = 8.5%
1980 = 10.0% – Reagan
1982 = 11.2% – Peak
1990 = 7.0%
2000 = 2.0%
2006 = -1.1% (Negative = withdrawing from savings)

A 12.3% drop after Reagan.

4. WORKERS ALSO BORROWED TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.

Household Debt as percentage of GDP:

1965 = 46%
1970 = 45%
1980 = 50% – Reagan
1990 = 61%
2000 = 69%
2007 = 95%

A 45% increase after 1980.

5. SO THE GAP BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST HAS GROWN.

Gap Between the Share of Capital Income earned by the top 1%
and the bottom 80%:

1980 = 10%
2003 = 56%

A 5.6 times increase.

6. AND THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE.

The Probably of Moving Up from the Bottom 40% to the Top 40%:

1945 = 12%
1958 = 6%
1990 = 3%
2000 = 2%

A 10% Decrease.

Links:

1 = ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/pf/totalf1.txt

 

[SmokeALib]

At least finding good workers is not an issue in the us since there is a huge surp!us of hard working people.

At least finding good workers is not an issue in the us since there is a huge surp!us of hard working people.

From Mexico

That's weird....all the "hard working" people I know are able to support themselves and their families without stealing from REAL Americans.

A lot more barely now duh... Can you spot when it all went to hell, dingbat?


The Demise of the American Middle Class In Numbers.

Over the past 35 years the American dream has gradually disappeared. The process was slow, so most people didn’t notice. They just worked a few more hours, borrowed a little more and cut back on non-essentials. But looking at the numbers and comparing them over long time periods, it is obvious that things have changed drastically. Here are the details:

1. WORKERS PRODUCE MORE BUT THE GAINS GO TO BUSINESS.

Over the past 63 years worker productivity has grown by 2.0% per year.

But after 1980, workers received a smaller share every year. Labor’s share of income (1992 = 100%):

1950 = 101%
1960 = 105%
1970 = 105%
1980 = 105% – Reagan
1990 = 100%
2000 = 96%
2007 = 92%

A 13% drop since 1980

2. THE TOP 10% GET A LARGER SHARE.

Share of National Income going to Top 10%:

1950 = 35%
1960 = 34%
1970 = 34%
1980 = 34% – Reagan
1990 = 40%
2000 = 47%
2007 = 50%

An increase of 16% since Reagan.

3. WORKERS COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF INCOME BY SPENDING THEIR SAVINGS.

The savings Rose up to Reagan and fell during and after.

1950 = 6.0%
1960 = 7.0%
1970 = 8.5%
1980 = 10.0% – Reagan
1982 = 11.2% – Peak
1990 = 7.0%
2000 = 2.0%
2006 = -1.1% (Negative = withdrawing from savings)

A 12.3% drop after Reagan.

4. WORKERS ALSO BORROWED TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.

Household Debt as percentage of GDP:

1965 = 46%
1970 = 45%
1980 = 50% – Reagan
1990 = 61%
2000 = 69%
2007 = 95%

A 45% increase after 1980.

5. SO THE GAP BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST HAS GROWN.

Gap Between the Share of Capital Income earned by the top 1%
and the bottom 80%:

1980 = 10%
2003 = 56%

A 5.6 times increase.

6. AND THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE.

The Probably of Moving Up from the Bottom 40% to the Top 40%:

1945 = 12%
1958 = 6%
1990 = 3%
2000 = 2%

A 10% Decrease.

Links:

1 = ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/pf/totalf1.txt

Government check? DUPE.

 

[francoHFW]

The top 10% are taking 90% of all the wealth and destroying our fucking middle class. Explain to me why it is ok for them to suck this country dry and how that is good for people that work hard every fucking day.

Actually the top 1% are taking 98%....

Actually, dupe, Democrats tried to end illegal immigration in 2010. The GOP will keep it going forever.

Bullshit they did. Why didn't they end it in 2009 when they had total control over the government?

Talk about dupes. You don't even understand what the commie party is up to. They stopped Kate's law, they are fighting tooth and nail for their sanctuary cities, they are now creating sanctuary states, they shut down the government on behalf of illegals, they refuse to allow the wall to be built, Piglosi almost drove herself to a stroke by yapping for 8 hours on behalf of illegals, and you're stupid enough to believe they actually want illegals stopped? Amazing.

If I ever tried to sell anybody a bridge, I would make sure they were a Democrat, because Democrats will believe anything you tell them.

2010 Democratic immigration bill gave amnesty to worthy immigrants and had a SS ID card that would end illegal immigration. Of Of course you know nothing about it, Duke. Democrats had 35 days of control and used it all on ACA. Nobody expected Scott Brown.

What bull you blind bat. Amnesty would have been one of many if up to Democrats. That wouldn't' have ended illegal immigration, it would have only given Democrats more voters in the future. Man do they have the wool pulled over your eyes.

Of course and SS ID card that can't be fake wood stop it. But of course that would be communist right, silly Dupe.

How would a stupid Fn card stop illegals? Would an SS card build a wall? Would an SS card put more border patrols up there? Would an SS card stop people from coming here and having anchor babies and then use our welfare systems to support those kids?

They would have kept coming here with the blessing from the Democrats. They screwed Reagan years ago, but we learned our lesson when it comes to trusting lying Democrats.

The wall is stupid and won't work. Half of illegals overstay their visas, and they will figure out other ways to get here. Of course if they can't work they won't come duh. So brainwashed...

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The top 10% are taking 90% of all the wealth and destroying our fucking middle class. Explain to me why it is ok for them to suck this country dry and how that is good for people that work hard every fucking day.

Actually the top 1% are taking 98%....

Bullshit they did. Why didn't they end it in 2009 when they had total control over the government?

Talk about dupes. You don't even understand what the commie party is up to. They stopped Kate's law, they are fighting tooth and nail for their sanctuary cities, they are now creating sanctuary states, they shut down the government on behalf of illegals, they refuse to allow the wall to be built, Piglosi almost drove herself to a stroke by yapping for 8 hours on behalf of illegals, and you're stupid enough to believe they actually want illegals stopped? Amazing.

If I ever tried to sell anybody a bridge, I would make sure they were a Democrat, because Democrats will believe anything you tell them.

2010 Democratic immigration bill gave amnesty to worthy immigrants and had a SS ID card that would end illegal immigration. Of Of course you know nothing about it, Duke. Democrats had 35 days of control and used it all on ACA. Nobody expected Scott Brown.

What bull you blind bat. Amnesty would have been one of many if up to Democrats. That wouldn't' have ended illegal immigration, it would have only given Democrats more voters in the future. Man do they have the wool pulled over your eyes.

Of course and SS ID card that can't be fake wood stop it. But of course that would be communist right, silly Dupe.

How would a stupid Fn card stop illegals? Would an SS card build a wall? Would an SS card put more border patrols up there? Would an SS card stop people from coming here and having anchor babies and then use our welfare systems to support those kids?

They would have kept coming here with the blessing from the Democrats. They screwed Reagan years ago, but we learned our lesson when it comes to trusting lying Democrats.

The wall is stupid and won't work. Half of illegals overstay their visas, and they will figure out other ways to get here. Of course if they can't work they won't come duh. So brainwashed...

Yeah, and a SS card would have stopped all that now wouldn't it? A wall will work which is why the Democrats are so scared of it. They want as many illegals here as possible. Even they know the wall will stop much of it which is why they were even willing to shut down the government to stop it.

 

[francoHFW]

At least finding good workers is not an issue in the us since there is a huge surp!us of hard working people.

At least finding good workers is not an issue in the us since there is a huge surp!us of hard working people.

From Mexico

That's weird....all the "hard working" people I know are able to support themselves and their families without stealing from REAL Americans.

A lot more barely now duh... Can you spot when it all went to hell, dingbat?


The Demise of the American Middle Class In Numbers.

Over the past 35 years the American dream has gradually disappeared. The process was slow, so most people didn’t notice. They just worked a few more hours, borrowed a little more and cut back on non-essentials. But looking at the numbers and comparing them over long time periods, it is obvious that things have changed drastically. Here are the details:

1. WORKERS PRODUCE MORE BUT THE GAINS GO TO BUSINESS.

Over the past 63 years worker productivity has grown by 2.0% per year.

But after 1980, workers received a smaller share every year. Labor’s share of income (1992 = 100%):

1950 = 101%
1960 = 105%
1970 = 105%
1980 = 105% – Reagan
1990 = 100%
2000 = 96%
2007 = 92%

A 13% drop since 1980

2. THE TOP 10% GET A LARGER SHARE.

Share of National Income going to Top 10%:

1950 = 35%
1960 = 34%
1970 = 34%
1980 = 34% – Reagan
1990 = 40%
2000 = 47%
2007 = 50%

An increase of 16% since Reagan.

3. WORKERS COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF INCOME BY SPENDING THEIR SAVINGS.

The savings Rose up to Reagan and fell during and after.

1950 = 6.0%
1960 = 7.0%
1970 = 8.5%
1980 = 10.0% – Reagan
1982 = 11.2% – Peak
1990 = 7.0%
2000 = 2.0%
2006 = -1.1% (Negative = withdrawing from savings)

A 12.3% drop after Reagan.

4. WORKERS ALSO BORROWED TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.

Household Debt as percentage of GDP:

1965 = 46%
1970 = 45%
1980 = 50% – Reagan
1990 = 61%
2000 = 69%
2007 = 95%

A 45% increase after 1980.

5. SO THE GAP BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST HAS GROWN.

Gap Between the Share of Capital Income earned by the top 1%
and the bottom 80%:

1980 = 10%
2003 = 56%

A 5.6 times increase.

6. AND THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE.

The Probably of Moving Up from the Bottom 40% to the Top 40%:

1945 = 12%
1958 = 6%
1990 = 3%
2000 = 2%

A 10% Decrease.

Links:

1 = ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/pf/totalf1.txt

Government check? DUPE.

Read it, brainwashed functional moron.

 

[LuckyDuck]

Well to be fair to them, they expect you to fund it.

They’ll just stand there with their hands out like a beggar in the street preying on your sympathies have and have NO intention of funding any of this themselves, but someone else?

Oh Hell yah they are all for that!

You want free health care...right?
You want free college...right?
You want ‘welfare’ increased...right?
You want higher minimum wage...right?
You want more spent on ‘science’...right?
AND you want to extend all of what you want to 12-50 million illegal aliens...right?

Soooo, how do you think this all happens and why do you think our most productive, positive contributors should happily embrace the idea of funding it all?

Like California.

 

[eddiew37]

OP-er, I suspect you don't much care for it when folks, rather than being courteous enough to present you with neutrally phrased questions that request clarification(s), take it upon themselves to frame, oversimplify, extrapolate ad absurdum, mis-contextualize, and/or employ other means of equivocation to bend what you say into something you didn't have in mind or say.....


OP-er, are you truly not aware that the nature of your perceptions about what Democrats have officially asserted they "want" and what Democrats have officially asserted they indeed "want" just aren't the same things? For some strange reason, you seem to have heard someone whom you believe to be a Democrat state they think/want that "such and such" be done, and hearing that person say such, you in turn infer that that single individual's (or group's) attestations are the official positions of the Democratic party. Well, unless the person whom you heard utter "whatever" is the Chairman of the DNC, or someone speaking formally on his behalf, the remarks you heard are merely that person's wishes and wants and some quantity of others may or may not agree with that person, but none of their doing so makes the given position be that of Democrats in the "broad brush" way you've presented the notions in your OP.....

You want free health care...right?
You want free college...right?
You want ‘welfare’ increased...right?
You want higher minimum wage...right?
You want more spent on ‘science’...right?
AND you want to extend all of what you want to 12-50 million illegal aliens...right?

Soooo, how do you think this all happens and why do you think our most productive, positive contributors should happily embrace the idea of funding it all?

....To wit, would you please provide the credible documentation that specifies that the things you assert Democrats want are in fact things the Democrats have asserted that they want.

You want free health care...right?

In what context(s)? Even the ACA didn't propose free healthcare in the unqualified way your statement above does.

You want free college...right?

AFAIK, no. I am aware that some Democrats have advocated for free college, the Democratic 2016 platform did not attest to "wanting free college," which is not the same thing as aiming to make community college free, the latter being part of the Democrats' 2016 platform.

You want ‘welfare’ increased...right?

I'm not going to address this question you posed because it's too vague and too ambiguous. If you can add the following elements of precision to your question, I might be able to give you a credible answer.

• What do you mean by "increase?"
  • Lower the qualification requirements one must meet to receive public assistance, thereby increasing the quantity of people who are eligible to receive it?
  • Increase the maximum sum of assistance that may be provided under any given program?
  • Increase the actual sum of assistance given to individuals/families meeting certain criteria?
  • Increase the nature of assistance that may be given to include goods/services that are not currently in the "bundle" of "stuff" qualifying individuals may receive?
• Quantify, please, the nature and extent to which you perceive Democrats want to increase "welfare."
  • What do you consider to be welfare? Feel free, so long as you are precise, to enumerate specific programs or precisely describe specific genres of resource distributions, or precisely describe the beneficiaries and benefactors of welfare such that there's no overlap between them and there's no mistaking what individuals and entities fall into either class.

You want higher minimum wage...right?

Democrats probably do want to see the federal minimum wage increased to $15/hour.

You want more spent on ‘science’...right?

More than what? I'm not aware that Democrats expressly have articulated a "want" for more being spent on science. I am aware that Democrats have decried the reductions in spending that the current Administration has effected.

AND you want to extend all of what you want to 12-50 million illegal aliens...right?

I have not ever seen anything indicating that Democrats want to extend all of anything n the "broad brush" way you've described it to the 11M illegal aliens who are in the U.S.​

So, OP-er, if you can add some specificity to your questions so that they can actually be answered directly with a "yes" or "no" that can be objectively shown to be either accurate or inaccurate, well, then you might find you get some substantive conversation going.....

Xleor this board is packed with the worst crap in our country .... Republicans

 

[SmokeALib]

OP-er, I suspect you don't much care for it when folks, rather than being courteous enough to present you with neutrally phrased questions that request clarification(s), take it upon themselves to frame, oversimplify, extrapolate ad absurdum, mis-contextualize, and/or employ other means of equivocation to bend what you say into something you didn't have in mind or say.....


OP-er, are you truly not aware that the nature of your perceptions about what Democrats have officially asserted they "want" and what Democrats have officially asserted they indeed "want" just aren't the same things? For some strange reason, you seem to have heard someone whom you believe to be a Democrat state they think/want that "such and such" be done, and hearing that person say such, you in turn infer that that single individual's (or group's) attestations are the official positions of the Democratic party. Well, unless the person whom you heard utter "whatever" is the Chairman of the DNC, or someone speaking formally on his behalf, the remarks you heard are merely that person's wishes and wants and some quantity of others may or may not agree with that person, but none of their doing so makes the given position be that of Democrats in the "broad brush" way you've presented the notions in your OP.....

You want free health care...right?
You want free college...right?
You want ‘welfare’ increased...right?
You want higher minimum wage...right?
You want more spent on ‘science’...right?
AND you want to extend all of what you want to 12-50 million illegal aliens...right?

Soooo, how do you think this all happens and why do you think our most productive, positive contributors should happily embrace the idea of funding it all?

....To wit, would you please provide the credible documentation that specifies that the things you assert Democrats want are in fact things the Democrats have asserted that they want.

You want free health care...right?

In what context(s)? Even the ACA didn't propose free healthcare in the unqualified way your statement above does.

You want free college...right?

AFAIK, no. I am aware that some Democrats have advocated for free college, the Democratic 2016 platform did not attest to "wanting free college," which is not the same thing as aiming to make community college free, the latter being part of the Democrats' 2016 platform.

You want ‘welfare’ increased...right?

I'm not going to address this question you posed because it's too vague and too ambiguous. If you can add the following elements of precision to your question, I might be able to give you a credible answer.

• What do you mean by "increase?"
  • Lower the qualification requirements one must meet to receive public assistance, thereby increasing the quantity of people who are eligible to receive it?
  • Increase the maximum sum of assistance that may be provided under any given program?
  • Increase the actual sum of assistance given to individuals/families meeting certain criteria?
  • Increase the nature of assistance that may be given to include goods/services that are not currently in the "bundle" of "stuff" qualifying individuals may receive?
• Quantify, please, the nature and extent to which you perceive Democrats want to increase "welfare."
  • What do you consider to be welfare? Feel free, so long as you are precise, to enumerate specific programs or precisely describe specific genres of resource distributions, or precisely describe the beneficiaries and benefactors of welfare such that there's no overlap between them and there's no mistaking what individuals and entities fall into either class.

You want higher minimum wage...right?

Democrats probably do want to see the federal minimum wage increased to $15/hour.

You want more spent on ‘science’...right?

More than what? I'm not aware that Democrats expressly have articulated a "want" for more being spent on science. I am aware that Democrats have decried the reductions in spending that the current Administration has effected.

AND you want to extend all of what you want to 12-50 million illegal aliens...right?

I have not ever seen anything indicating that Democrats want to extend all of anything n the "broad brush" way you've described it to the 11M illegal aliens who are in the U.S.​

So, OP-er, if you can add some specificity to your questions so that they can actually be answered directly with a "yes" or "no" that can be objectively shown to be either accurate or inaccurate, well, then you might find you get some substantive conversation going.....

Xleor this board is packed with the worst crap in our country .... Republicans

Government check?

 

[usmbguest5318]

OP-er, I suspect you don't much care for it when folks, rather than being courteous enough to present you with neutrally phrased questions that request clarification(s), take it upon themselves to frame, oversimplify, extrapolate ad absurdum, mis-contextualize, and/or employ other means of equivocation to bend what you say into something you didn't have in mind or say.....


OP-er, are you truly not aware that the nature of your perceptions about what Democrats have officially asserted they "want" and what Democrats have officially asserted they indeed "want" just aren't the same things? For some strange reason, you seem to have heard someone whom you believe to be a Democrat state they think/want that "such and such" be done, and hearing that person say such, you in turn infer that that single individual's (or group's) attestations are the official positions of the Democratic party. Well, unless the person whom you heard utter "whatever" is the Chairman of the DNC, or someone speaking formally on his behalf, the remarks you heard are merely that person's wishes and wants and some quantity of others may or may not agree with that person, but none of their doing so makes the given position be that of Democrats in the "broad brush" way you've presented the notions in your OP.....

You want free health care...right?
You want free college...right?
You want ‘welfare’ increased...right?
You want higher minimum wage...right?
You want more spent on ‘science’...right?
AND you want to extend all of what you want to 12-50 million illegal aliens...right?

Soooo, how do you think this all happens and why do you think our most productive, positive contributors should happily embrace the idea of funding it all?

....To wit, would you please provide the credible documentation that specifies that the things you assert Democrats want are in fact things the Democrats have asserted that they want.

You want free health care...right?

In what context(s)? Even the ACA didn't propose free healthcare in the unqualified way your statement above does.

You want free college...right?

AFAIK, no. I am aware that some Democrats have advocated for free college, the Democratic 2016 platform did not attest to "wanting free college," which is not the same thing as aiming to make community college free, the latter being part of the Democrats' 2016 platform.

You want ‘welfare’ increased...right?

I'm not going to address this question you posed because it's too vague and too ambiguous. If you can add the following elements of precision to your question, I might be able to give you a credible answer.

• What do you mean by "increase?"
  • Lower the qualification requirements one must meet to receive public assistance, thereby increasing the quantity of people who are eligible to receive it?
  • Increase the maximum sum of assistance that may be provided under any given program?
  • Increase the actual sum of assistance given to individuals/families meeting certain criteria?
  • Increase the nature of assistance that may be given to include goods/services that are not currently in the "bundle" of "stuff" qualifying individuals may receive?
• Quantify, please, the nature and extent to which you perceive Democrats want to increase "welfare."
  • What do you consider to be welfare? Feel free, so long as you are precise, to enumerate specific programs or precisely describe specific genres of resource distributions, or precisely describe the beneficiaries and benefactors of welfare such that there's no overlap between them and there's no mistaking what individuals and entities fall into either class.

You want higher minimum wage...right?

Democrats probably do want to see the federal minimum wage increased to $15/hour.

You want more spent on ‘science’...right?

More than what? I'm not aware that Democrats expressly have articulated a "want" for more being spent on science. I am aware that Democrats have decried the reductions in spending that the current Administration has effected.

AND you want to extend all of what you want to 12-50 million illegal aliens...right?

I have not ever seen anything indicating that Democrats want to extend all of anything n the "broad brush" way you've described it to the 11M illegal aliens who are in the U.S.​

So, OP-er, if you can add some specificity to your questions so that they can actually be answered directly with a "yes" or "no" that can be objectively shown to be either accurate or inaccurate, well, then you might find you get some substantive conversation going.....

Xelor this board is packed with the worst crap in our country .... Republicans

Well, while I think this board's membership consists of some of the worst kind of Republicans, I don't remotely think that Republicans in general are the "worst crap in our country." I believe that at times the Republican Party has (1) advanced into leadership roles among the most odious malefactors and ethically derelict human beings in existence and (2) advanced some of the most ill-timed and/or ill-conceived policies imaginable. That said, so too at times has the Democratic Party.

Both parties have had their share of saints and scoundrels. (That, for me at least, is reason enough to eschew aligning myself with any party and instead advocate for/against specific policies and modes of their implementation.) It just so happens that at this point in history, the GOP is led by an inveterate scoundrel of the highest order. In other times, the Democratic Party has been likewise inaptly and ineptly led.

 

[francoHFW]

OP-er, I suspect you don't much care for it when folks, rather than being courteous enough to present you with neutrally phrased questions that request clarification(s), take it upon themselves to frame, oversimplify, extrapolate ad absurdum, mis-contextualize, and/or employ other means of equivocation to bend what you say into something you didn't have in mind or say.....


OP-er, are you truly not aware that the nature of your perceptions about what Democrats have officially asserted they "want" and what Democrats have officially asserted they indeed "want" just aren't the same things? For some strange reason, you seem to have heard someone whom you believe to be a Democrat state they think/want that "such and such" be done, and hearing that person say such, you in turn infer that that single individual's (or group's) attestations are the official positions of the Democratic party. Well, unless the person whom you heard utter "whatever" is the Chairman of the DNC, or someone speaking formally on his behalf, the remarks you heard are merely that person's wishes and wants and some quantity of others may or may not agree with that person, but none of their doing so makes the given position be that of Democrats in the "broad brush" way you've presented the notions in your OP.....

You want free health care...right?
You want free college...right?
You want ‘welfare’ increased...right?
You want higher minimum wage...right?
You want more spent on ‘science’...right?
AND you want to extend all of what you want to 12-50 million illegal aliens...right?

Soooo, how do you think this all happens and why do you think our most productive, positive contributors should happily embrace the idea of funding it all?

....To wit, would you please provide the credible documentation that specifies that the things you assert Democrats want are in fact things the Democrats have asserted that they want.

You want free health care...right?

In what context(s)? Even the ACA didn't propose free healthcare in the unqualified way your statement above does.

You want free college...right?

AFAIK, no. I am aware that some Democrats have advocated for free college, the Democratic 2016 platform did not attest to "wanting free college," which is not the same thing as aiming to make community college free, the latter being part of the Democrats' 2016 platform.

You want ‘welfare’ increased...right?

I'm not going to address this question you posed because it's too vague and too ambiguous. If you can add the following elements of precision to your question, I might be able to give you a credible answer.

• What do you mean by "increase?"
  • Lower the qualification requirements one must meet to receive public assistance, thereby increasing the quantity of people who are eligible to receive it?
  • Increase the maximum sum of assistance that may be provided under any given program?
  • Increase the actual sum of assistance given to individuals/families meeting certain criteria?
  • Increase the nature of assistance that may be given to include goods/services that are not currently in the "bundle" of "stuff" qualifying individuals may receive?
• Quantify, please, the nature and extent to which you perceive Democrats want to increase "welfare."
  • What do you consider to be welfare? Feel free, so long as you are precise, to enumerate specific programs or precisely describe specific genres of resource distributions, or precisely describe the beneficiaries and benefactors of welfare such that there's no overlap between them and there's no mistaking what individuals and entities fall into either class.

You want higher minimum wage...right?

Democrats probably do want to see the federal minimum wage increased to $15/hour.

You want more spent on ‘science’...right?

More than what? I'm not aware that Democrats expressly have articulated a "want" for more being spent on science. I am aware that Democrats have decried the reductions in spending that the current Administration has effected.

AND you want to extend all of what you want to 12-50 million illegal aliens...right?

I have not ever seen anything indicating that Democrats want to extend all of anything n the "broad brush" way you've described it to the 11M illegal aliens who are in the U.S.​

So, OP-er, if you can add some specificity to your questions so that they can actually be answered directly with a "yes" or "no" that can be objectively shown to be either accurate or inaccurate, well, then you might find you get some substantive conversation going.....

Xelor this board is packed with the worst crap in our country .... Republicans

Well, while I think this board's membership consists of some of the worst kind of Republicans, I don't remotely think that Republicans in general are the "worst crap in our country." I believe that at times the Republican Party has (1) advanced into leadership roles among the most odious malefactors and ethically derelict human beings in existence and (2) advanced some of the most ill-timed and/or ill-conceived policies imaginable. That said, so too at times has the Democratic Party.

Both parties have had their share of saints and scoundrels. (That, for me at least, is reason enough to eschew aligning myself with any party and instead advocate for/against specific policies and modes of their implementation.) It just so happens that at this point in history, the GOP is led by an inveterate scoundrel of the highest order. In other times, the Democratic Party has been likewise inaptly and ineptly led.

Democrats don't have a Hate propaganda Machine. Rush Savage Hannity etc etc are disgrace ful.

 

[usmbguest5318]

OP-er, I suspect you don't much care for it when folks, rather than being courteous enough to present you with neutrally phrased questions that request clarification(s), take it upon themselves to frame, oversimplify, extrapolate ad absurdum, mis-contextualize, and/or employ other means of equivocation to bend what you say into something you didn't have in mind or say.....


OP-er, are you truly not aware that the nature of your perceptions about what Democrats have officially asserted they "want" and what Democrats have officially asserted they indeed "want" just aren't the same things? For some strange reason, you seem to have heard someone whom you believe to be a Democrat state they think/want that "such and such" be done, and hearing that person say such, you in turn infer that that single individual's (or group's) attestations are the official positions of the Democratic party. Well, unless the person whom you heard utter "whatever" is the Chairman of the DNC, or someone speaking formally on his behalf, the remarks you heard are merely that person's wishes and wants and some quantity of others may or may not agree with that person, but none of their doing so makes the given position be that of Democrats in the "broad brush" way you've presented the notions in your OP.....

You want free health care...right?
You want free college...right?
You want ‘welfare’ increased...right?
You want higher minimum wage...right?
You want more spent on ‘science’...right?
AND you want to extend all of what you want to 12-50 million illegal aliens...right?

Soooo, how do you think this all happens and why do you think our most productive, positive contributors should happily embrace the idea of funding it all?

....To wit, would you please provide the credible documentation that specifies that the things you assert Democrats want are in fact things the Democrats have asserted that they want.

You want free health care...right?

In what context(s)? Even the ACA didn't propose free healthcare in the unqualified way your statement above does.

You want free college...right?

AFAIK, no. I am aware that some Democrats have advocated for free college, the Democratic 2016 platform did not attest to "wanting free college," which is not the same thing as aiming to make community college free, the latter being part of the Democrats' 2016 platform.

You want ‘welfare’ increased...right?

I'm not going to address this question you posed because it's too vague and too ambiguous. If you can add the following elements of precision to your question, I might be able to give you a credible answer.

• What do you mean by "increase?"
  • Lower the qualification requirements one must meet to receive public assistance, thereby increasing the quantity of people who are eligible to receive it?
  • Increase the maximum sum of assistance that may be provided under any given program?
  • Increase the actual sum of assistance given to individuals/families meeting certain criteria?
  • Increase the nature of assistance that may be given to include goods/services that are not currently in the "bundle" of "stuff" qualifying individuals may receive?
• Quantify, please, the nature and extent to which you perceive Democrats want to increase "welfare."
  • What do you consider to be welfare? Feel free, so long as you are precise, to enumerate specific programs or precisely describe specific genres of resource distributions, or precisely describe the beneficiaries and benefactors of welfare such that there's no overlap between them and there's no mistaking what individuals and entities fall into either class.

You want higher minimum wage...right?

Democrats probably do want to see the federal minimum wage increased to $15/hour.

You want more spent on ‘science’...right?

More than what? I'm not aware that Democrats expressly have articulated a "want" for more being spent on science. I am aware that Democrats have decried the reductions in spending that the current Administration has effected.

AND you want to extend all of what you want to 12-50 million illegal aliens...right?

I have not ever seen anything indicating that Democrats want to extend all of anything n the "broad brush" way you've described it to the 11M illegal aliens who are in the U.S.​

So, OP-er, if you can add some specificity to your questions so that they can actually be answered directly with a "yes" or "no" that can be objectively shown to be either accurate or inaccurate, well, then you might find you get some substantive conversation going.....

Xelor this board is packed with the worst crap in our country .... Republicans

Well, while I think this board's membership consists of some of the worst kind of Republicans, I don't remotely think that Republicans in general are the "worst crap in our country." I believe that at times the Republican Party has (1) advanced into leadership roles among the most odious malefactors and ethically derelict human beings in existence and (2) advanced some of the most ill-timed and/or ill-conceived policies imaginable. That said, so too at times has the Democratic Party.

Both parties have had their share of saints and scoundrels. (That, for me at least, is reason enough to eschew aligning myself with any party and instead advocate for/against specific policies and modes of their implementation.) It just so happens that at this point in history, the GOP is led by an inveterate scoundrel of the highest order. In other times, the Democratic Party has been likewise inaptly and ineptly led.

Democrats don't have a Hate propaganda Machine. Rush Savage Hannity etc etc are disgrace ful.

I'll have to take your word for that. I don't don't deliberately consume the propaganda of any political party or its media adjuncts. I think as you read more and more of the linked content in my posts, you'll see that very rarely do I cite any mass media outlet's content in support of my public policy stances.

 

[eddiew37]

Trump stiffs us again
Wanna bet what Trump is about to disclose about infrastructure is that he isn't going to pay for it? Wanna bet he dumps it on the States? What a deal! The States will have to raise taxes as he stiffs the nation once again just like he did on his signature 'wall' and gins up another arms race to boot.

 

[BrokeLoser]

Trump stiffs us again
Wanna bet what Trump is about to disclose about infrastructure is that he isn't going to pay for it? Wanna bet he dumps it on the States? What a deal! The States will have to raise taxes as he stiffs the nation once again just like he did on his signature 'wall' and gins up another arms race to boot.

I wouldn’t doubt it....and I hope he does dump it on the states.
The states that desperately need infrastructure improvements are sanctuary shitholes...with these states working against the Feds in solving federal crime Donny will need to beef up iCE and supporting agencies. Get on board with Making America American Again or get rolled over. Simple shit.

 

[rightwinger]

Trump stiffs us again
Wanna bet what Trump is about to disclose about infrastructure is that he isn't going to pay for it? Wanna bet he dumps it on the States? What a deal! The States will have to raise taxes as he stiffs the nation once again just like he did on his signature 'wall' and gins up another arms race to boot.

I wouldn’t doubt it....and I hope he does dump it on the states.
The states that desperately need infrastructure improvements are sanctuary shitholes...with these states working against the Feds in solving federal crime Donny will need to beef up iCE and supporting agencies. Get on board with Making America American Again or get rolled over. Simple shit.

Most of our failing infrastructure is in red states

 

[bendog]

You want free health care...right?
You want free college...right?
You want ‘welfare’ increased...right?
You want higher minimum wage...right?
You want more spent on ‘science’...right?
AND you want to extend all of what you want to 12-50 million illegal aliens...right?

Soooo, how do you think this all happens and why do you think our most productive, positive contributors should happily embrace the idea of funding it all?

They need slaves to do all the work (sarcasm)

 

[BrokeLoser]

Trump stiffs us again
Wanna bet what Trump is about to disclose about infrastructure is that he isn't going to pay for it? Wanna bet he dumps it on the States? What a deal! The States will have to raise taxes as he stiffs the nation once again just like he did on his signature 'wall' and gins up another arms race to boot.

I wouldn’t doubt it....and I hope he does dump it on the states.
The states that desperately need infrastructure improvements are sanctuary shitholes...with these states working against the Feds in solving federal crime Donny will need to beef up iCE and supporting agencies. Get on board with Making America American Again or get rolled over. Simple shit.

Most of our failing infrastructure is in red states

Haha...NEGATIVE...wrong again.
10 US states most in need of Trump's $1.5 trillion infrastructure plan

Now look at all the blue shithole cities desperately in need of funding for infrastructure.
MAKE AMERICA AMERICAN AGAIN!