You cannot help the poor by giving more tax cuts to the rich

[oldsalt]

Trickle-Up Poverty economics is gay............thats what we have now. Its a brilliant strategy politically........make the lower class bigger with handouts = permanent votes.

Whats hysterical is that the majority of the lefties who troll on here believe that the intentions of these people are noble and that these politicans are genuinely looking out for the little guy.

What's hysterical is that you kowtow to the likes of the cock bros, failin' palin, rush bunghole, et al......All the while voting against your best interests. THAT is hysterical.

 

[skookerasbil]

Trickle-Up Poverty economics is gay............thats what we have now. Its a brilliant strategy politically........make the lower class bigger with handouts = permanent votes.

Whats hysterical is that the majority of the lefties who troll on here believe that the intentions of these people are noble and that these politicans are genuinely looking out for the little guy.

What's hysterical is that you kowtow to the likes of the cock bros, failin' palin, rush bunghole, et al......All the while voting against your best interests. THAT is hysterical.

Hey.....I hope they continue the trickle-up poverty strategy for another 16 months or so. In fact, I'm praying they do.

Indeed.......it will be sweet to put this type of public policy out to pasture for at least a generation, and it may well be the whole concept will be placed in a glass case in some museum, on display as a relic of a former era.

We tried this BS 35 years ago. It was an epic disaster then. It is an epic disaster now. It will be a mnimum of 30 to 40 years before a far left approach is adopted again, which does beg the rhetorical question.

Who's gonna have more fun on these forums the next 16 months??

 

[Bern80]

Once again... do you feel that everyone has the intellect to go to college? Your ******* bigoted assertions are what I hate about the Tea Party... These are the reasons that there is no ******* way that I believe you about "charity". You hate people that you consider "lesser" than you. Guess people who aren't book smart enough to go to College should just be sent to the gas chamber... I know.. we'll lock them up in these camps... we'll call them "concentration camps"... because that's their whole problem.. they refuse to concentrate, right? Then... we'll tell them that before we teach them how to Concentrate... they have to take a shower first... all that Ditch Digging makes them sweaty and stinky.... then we'll get them into the showers... and instead of water... we'll gas them with cyanide.

**** you you fascist bastard.

A don't get all bent out of shape. People on the right don't think lesser of people who go to college. In fact a lot on the right (including myself) think a lot of college is a collossal waste of money and a scam.

Don't get out of shape? Re-read your post. Do you think your bullshit comes from a reasonable point of view, or from a string of ridiculous beliefs? Sure... some people make mistakes in their lives and could have done more... but the truth is, many of those former blue collar workers were in those positions, because that's where their strengths were. Now, you want to force round pegs into square holes and blame the peg because it don't fit. Manufacturing was our backbone of the country. Those kinds of people earned good money making things for people to buy and they could afford to buy them, as could pretty much everyone else. But now we have this crazy system where we want to lower the standard of living of everyone... except those so called "job creators"(who don't create jobs....in America anyway)... for those types of people.. things haven't been this good since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution... when robber/barons ruled the day.

Firstly, different poster bud.

Secondly. It's called adapting and having reasonable expectations. The labor market works a certain way, apparently not the way you think it should. Apparently you believe people are supposed to be compensated out of some altruistic compassion that employers have. As opposed to compensating people based on the value they are providing you. Yes, manufacturing WAS our backbone, but I don't recall that it was anywhere written where you were promised it would always be that way. Do you? When were you promised that demand for a product would always be there? When were you promised that you wouldn't have to adapt your skill set despite changes in market demand?

 

[Bern80]

Social security was and still is PRE-FUNDED by the American taxpayers. The FED doesn't pay for Social Security, it merely pays BACK social secutity for money it has been borrowing from SOCIAL SECURITY.

The Pentagon is largely funded by the USA taking on more NEW debt. The PENTAGON is the welfare recipient, SS is NOT.

Social security doesn't COST the Federal government a penny.

When the FED disburses SS moneies it is is paying back money it borrowed from SOCIAL SECURITY.

When the FED SPENDS money on the Pentagon it MUST DO SO by creating STILL MORE DEBT.

You guys understand these basic account facts, don't you?

Social security is one of the FED's CREDITORS. SS is not a supplicant asking for help, it is a CREDITOR demanding REPAYMENT.

The Pentagon is one of the WELFARE PROGRAMS that is forcing the FED to create still MORE DEBT.

If you conservatives are truly concerned about the national debt, and if you want our government to stop creating on new debt, SOCIAL SECURITY is not what you need to cut.

What you need to cut are those activities for which the government must borrow money to fund.

And that which is not actually constitutional as well. Which one can argue SS is not.

 

[JakeStarkey]

SS is constitutional. End of story. National health insurance is constitutional. End of story.

 

[Bern80]

SS is constitutional. End of story. National health insurance is constitutional. End of story.

When you can prove it by citing the authority given in the constitution for those things, then you may end the story.

 

[Always_Smooth]

Whats hysterical is that the majority of the lefties who troll on here believe that the intentions of these people are noble and that these politicans are genuinely looking out for the little guy.

If you have kids, wouldn't you say the responsible thing to do is take care of them? Make sure they're fed, not dying in the streets? Unlike conservatives, liberals actually care about everyone, not just rich white men.

 

[Rev.Hellh0und]

Whats hysterical is that the majority of the lefties who troll on here believe that the intentions of these people are noble and that these politicans are genuinely looking out for the little guy.

If you have kids, wouldn't you say the responsible thing to do is take care of them? Make sure they're fed, not dying in the streets? Unlike conservatives, liberals actually care about everyone, not just rich white men.

this is what passes for intelligent discourse around here?

 

[Bern80]

Whats hysterical is that the majority of the lefties who troll on here believe that the intentions of these people are noble and that these politicans are genuinely looking out for the little guy.

If you have kids, wouldn't you say the responsible thing to do is take care of them? Make sure they're fed, not dying in the streets? Unlike conservatives, liberals actually care about everyone, not just rich white men.

Get real. The problem with liberals is you try to couch your policies by telling people you care about them. You 'care' so much that you believe you have the right to use government to legislate that people behave just the way you want them to. All this 'caring' costs money, which you have to get from other people until you've 'cared' so much for them that you have deprived them of the means (their money) to actually exercise their freedom. So you can take your feigned compassion and shove it.

 

[Flaylo]

Trickle-Up Poverty economics is gay............thats what we have now. Its a brilliant strategy politically........make the lower class bigger with handouts = permanent votes.

Whats hysterical is that the majority of the lefties who troll on here believe that the intentions of these people are noble and that these politicans are genuinely looking out for the little guy.

There is no such thing as trickle up poverty, nor is it a scheme that liberals believe unlike that bullshat that conservatives believe in called trickle down which has never worked.

 

[Flaylo]

Whats hysterical is that the majority of the lefties who troll on here believe that the intentions of these people are noble and that these politicans are genuinely looking out for the little guy.

If you have kids, wouldn't you say the responsible thing to do is take care of them? Make sure they're fed, not dying in the streets? Unlike conservatives, liberals actually care about everyone, not just rich white men.

Get real. The problem with liberals is you try to couch your policies by telling people you care about them. You 'care' so much that you believe you have the right to use government to legislate that people behave just the way you want them to. All this 'caring' costs money, which you have to get from other people until you've 'cared' so much for them that you have deprived them of the means (their money) to actually exercise their freedom. So you can take your feigned compassion and shove it.

You rightwingers make it known you don't give a fack about the little man and think dog eat dog, not fairness is logical in world of haves, have nots and not have so much.

 

[Bern80]

If you have kids, wouldn't you say the responsible thing to do is take care of them? Make sure they're fed, not dying in the streets? Unlike conservatives, liberals actually care about everyone, not just rich white men.

Get real. The problem with liberals is you try to couch your policies by telling people you care about them. You 'care' so much that you believe you have the right to use government to legislate that people behave just the way you want them to. All this 'caring' costs money, which you have to get from other people until you've 'cared' so much for them that you have deprived them of the means (their money) to actually exercise their freedom. So you can take your feigned compassion and shove it.

You rightwingers make it known you don't give a fack about the little man and think dog eat dog, not fairness is logical in world of haves, have nots and not have so much.

That simply isn't true Failo. I know there isn'[t any way to convince you of that. The fundamental difference is how the sides view human nature. You liberals tend to believe that most people are apparently not to blame for the situation they are in thus it is agreeable to use other people's resources to help them out of said situation. The problem is that is observably false. Very few people are in a situation they did not directly contribute to or is impossible to get out of. It isn't government's job to manage anyone's life Failo, for better or worse. It's their job to protect your freedom to succeed or **** it up as you see fit. It isn't that we don't care about the little guy. It's that it is not government's job to take care of the little guy at my expense. No one is stopping you from being compassionate. Put YOUR ******* money where your mouth is for once. If you want to help people, go help them. I'm not stopping you. Or if you think government can do it better than you can and they need more money to do it, go ahead and give them more you than they say you owe them. I would gladly support any bill that proposed allowing people to donate money to the government. I'm sure you would too and would gladly give more because you're just so compassionate, right?

 

[JakeStarkey]

SS is constitutional. End of story. National health insurance is constitutional. End of story.

When you can prove it by citing the authority given in the constitution for those things, then you may end the story.

I don't have to prove this. Congress passed it and the President signed it, thus, ipso facto, until SCOTUS says different, the ball is in your court.

 

[BDBoop]

Taxes in proportion to what you make fairly is the best option.

No it isn't. That is not equality in taxation. Why should I pay more taxes than a homeless can man? Everybody should pay the same amount that the poorest among us can pay,...that is equality and fair.

And then our system falls apart due to lack of funds... which is what you want. You want small government which is not able to govern. Can I clue you in on something... let me make this as simple as possible.

You've obviously heard of "Trickle Down" economics, right? Well, the same goes for taxation. You cut the Fed, they have to make a decision on whether to raise taxes or cut programs... let's give you the Conservative Wet dream, let's say the cut everything to the bone and only run a defensive government... What used to be subsidized by the Fed is now squarely in the hands of the individual state... so... they have a decision to make, don't they? They can either raise taxes to accommodate the now defunct funds, or they themselves can cut to the core. Let's suppose once again...they do the "conservative" thing and cut to the core. Now... you are really in trouble. Everything that used to help get paid for from a much broader tax base... is now down to the local level. Once again... raise taxes to pay for your road crews, your policemen, your firemen, your teachers, your court system, janitors, inspectors... the whole works. Or Cut to the bone again.

This is your vision of how America Should be? A downward spiral of less? You guys need to be stopped...you're madmen.

What completely cracks me up is I am betting nobody on this board is one of the 400, or even anywhere near the wealthiest of Americans. So WHY the bullshit? Because maybe, baby; someday they will be? Are they all the babies of the family? Do they really think they are entitled to every last toy in the toy box?

 

[BDBoop]

That simply isn't true Failo. I know there isn'[t any way to convince you of that. The fundamental difference is how the sides view human nature. You liberals tend to believe that most people are apparently not to blame for the situation they are in thus it is agreeable to use other people's resources to help them out of said situation. The problem is that is observably false. Very few people are in a situation they did not directly contribute to or is impossible to get out of. It isn't government's job to manage anyone's life Failo, for better or worse. It's their job to protect your freedom to succeed or **** it up as you see fit. It isn't that we don't care about the little guy. It's that it is not government's job to take care of the little guy at my expense. No one is stopping you from being compassionate. Put YOUR ******* money where your mouth is for once. If you want to help people, go help them. I'm not stopping you. Or if you think government can do it better than you can and they need more money to do it, go ahead and give them more you than they say you owe them. I would gladly support any bill that proposed allowing people to donate money to the government. I'm sure you would too and would gladly give more because you're just so compassionate, right?

"We"? Are you one of the 400?

 

[Flaylo]

Get real. The problem with liberals is you try to couch your policies by telling people you care about them. You 'care' so much that you believe you have the right to use government to legislate that people behave just the way you want them to. All this 'caring' costs money, which you have to get from other people until you've 'cared' so much for them that you have deprived them of the means (their money) to actually exercise their freedom. So you can take your feigned compassion and shove it.

You rightwingers make it known you don't give a fack about the little man and think dog eat dog, not fairness is logical in world of haves, have nots and not have so much.

That simply isn't true Failo. I know there isn'[t any way to convince you of that. The fundamental difference is how the sides view human nature. You liberals tend to believe that most people are apparently not to blame for the situation they are in thus it is agreeable to use other people's resources to help them out of said situation. The problem is that is observably false. Very few people are in a situation they did not directly contribute to or is impossible to get out of. It isn't government's job to manage anyone's life Failo, for better or worse. It's their job to protect your freedom to succeed or **** it up as you see fit. It isn't that we don't care about the little guy. It's that it is not government's job to take care of the little guy at my expense. No one is stopping you from being compassionate. Put YOUR ******* money where your mouth is for once. If you want to help people, go help them. I'm not stopping you. Or if you think government can do it better than you can and they need more money to do it, go ahead and give them more you than they say you owe them. I would gladly support any bill that proposed allowing people to donate money to the government. I'm sure you would too and would gladly give more because you're just so compassionate, right?

Bullshat if I ever heard it, thats the problem with you jackassed rightwingers, you keep putting people into these boxes and defining in the most extreme ways possible.

 

[Bern80]

SS is constitutional. End of story. National health insurance is constitutional. End of story.

When you can prove it by citing the authority given in the constitution for those things, then you may end the story.

I don't have to prove this. Congress passed it and the President signed it, thus, ipso facto, until SCOTUS says different, the ball is in your court.

Then next I would ask you to point out in the constituion where it states that whatever congress does is constitutional because congress did it. Yes I'm sure I remember the framers being huge fans of circular logic.

 

[Jarhead]

If you have kids, wouldn't you say the responsible thing to do is take care of them? Make sure they're fed, not dying in the streets? Unlike conservatives, liberals actually care about everyone, not just rich white men.

Get real. The problem with liberals is you try to couch your policies by telling people you care about them. You 'care' so much that you believe you have the right to use government to legislate that people behave just the way you want them to. All this 'caring' costs money, which you have to get from other people until you've 'cared' so much for them that you have deprived them of the means (their money) to actually exercise their freedom. So you can take your feigned compassion and shove it.

You rightwingers make it known you don't give a fack about the little man and think dog eat dog, not fairness is logical in world of haves, have nots and not have so much.

it is not that we dont give a fack about the little man. It is that we believe in personal responsibility...personal choices....We expect nothing from another man and we exepct the other man to expect nothing from us.

We wish to live next to and prosper off of each other.

I do not use the term "little man"....I do not see another as "better off" or "less off" than I...it is none of my business.

Likewise, I am always there to offer assistance to those that can not help themselves...but I am rel;uctant to make someone elses problem, my problem. when they made a bad decision.

I lost much in the market a few years back. I blamed no one but myself for making bad decisions.

That is the way we believe it should be.

 

[Bern80]

You rightwingers make it known you don't give a fack about the little man and think dog eat dog, not fairness is logical in world of haves, have nots and not have so much.

That simply isn't true Failo. I know there isn'[t any way to convince you of that. The fundamental difference is how the sides view human nature. You liberals tend to believe that most people are apparently not to blame for the situation they are in thus it is agreeable to use other people's resources to help them out of said situation. The problem is that is observably false. Very few people are in a situation they did not directly contribute to or is impossible to get out of. It isn't government's job to manage anyone's life Failo, for better or worse. It's their job to protect your freedom to succeed or **** it up as you see fit. It isn't that we don't care about the little guy. It's that it is not government's job to take care of the little guy at my expense. No one is stopping you from being compassionate. Put YOUR ******* money where your mouth is for once. If you want to help people, go help them. I'm not stopping you. Or if you think government can do it better than you can and they need more money to do it, go ahead and give them more you than they say you owe them. I would gladly support any bill that proposed allowing people to donate money to the government. I'm sure you would too and would gladly give more because you're just so compassionate, right?

Bullshat if I ever heard it, thats the problem with you jackassed rightwingers, you keep putting people into these boxes and defining in the most extreme ways possible.

Well true, I'm sure you probably wouldn't man up and give congress more money or devote your self to helping others. That I'm sure is bullshit. I'm not sure what else is though.

 

[Bern80]

That simply isn't true Failo. I know there isn'[t any way to convince you of that. The fundamental difference is how the sides view human nature. You liberals tend to believe that most people are apparently not to blame for the situation they are in thus it is agreeable to use other people's resources to help them out of said situation. The problem is that is observably false. Very few people are in a situation they did not directly contribute to or is impossible to get out of. It isn't government's job to manage anyone's life Failo, for better or worse. It's their job to protect your freedom to succeed or **** it up as you see fit. It isn't that we don't care about the little guy. It's that it is not government's job to take care of the little guy at my expense. No one is stopping you from being compassionate. Put YOUR ******* money where your mouth is for once. If you want to help people, go help them. I'm not stopping you. Or if you think government can do it better than you can and they need more money to do it, go ahead and give them more you than they say you owe them. I would gladly support any bill that proposed allowing people to donate money to the government. I'm sure you would too and would gladly give more because you're just so compassionate, right?

"We"? Are you one of the 400?

'We' as in most on the left would consider me part of the right (though I'm more of a libertarian).