Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What you don't seem to understand is, none of these things require government involvement.
The aging population has my sympathies, but you don't necessarily need the government to deal with the aging population. Once-upon-a-time there was no government to deal with the aged(of course the average life expectancy was a bit shorter back then). But also, families took care of each other, and people actually spent their own money on their own retirements. The reason Social security was even put into place to begin with was because the great depression wiped out many older peoples investments(stock market crashed).
Social security is hardly an investment engine, it is nothing but a pre-pay system, which a large percentage of the population doesn't even get to use. Think about it this way, what if I die the day before I can collect social security and I have no wife and no kids? Every last dollar I paid into the system was for nothing. But what if I could invest that money myself over that same period of time? I could leave it to a friend, or even a niece or a sibling. Plus I would have a lot more money(and the poorer you are, generally the earlier you die).
America's education system is all messed up. I know you think you need the government to deal with college tuitions. But the people really benefitting are the colleges and the wealthy. Obviously its nice that the poor can go to college for free, but only certain courses are available to them, and only at certain collges. The government does also provide tuition subsidies to make college more affordable for everyone. Who does that help? Well since more than 90% of college attendees(who benefit from government tuition subsidies) are from the middle-class or higher, then the vast majority of these government subsidies go to those individuals. And what really happens is colleges just jack up their rates(leading to more demands for tuition subsidies).
Did you know that in the Soviet Union, that your common local doctor was actually one of the lower-tier jobs a person could have? Pretty weird huh? In many other socialist societies with free healthcare, doctors get paid very little compared to their American counterparts.
The military spending is unnecessary, and I don't see it continuing that far into the future. America is gasping right now to hold onto its empire, it will soon have competitors to its reign.
There is very little of what government currently spends that is truly necessary. So don't pretend that "lowering taxes" isn't a possibility.
Umm, Sarah Palin is a complete idiot, why does anyone care what she has to say? It make me vomit a little in my mouth when they were having this debate for chairman of the Republican national committee. They asked the question whether Sarah Palain could win in a general election and all the candidates said a resounding "Yes". I'm like, wow what a bunch of idiots. How does lying to the judges feel? Kind of like all those beauty queens calling for "world peace"?
And unemployment benefits are understandable to a certain degree, but after almost two years, those people should have found something, anything. How long are unemployment benefits supposed to last exactly? Till unemployment is back at 6%? It isn't as if there aren't plenty of people who will choose not to work so they can sit around collecting their free money.
You don't want to raise taxes when you are trying to recover from a recession, its common economic truth. In a couple years when unemployment is back at acceptable levels, then we can talk about raising taxes. As for the Clinton tax increase. People act as if the tax increase somehow helped the economy. Is that what you think? You think the good economy of the late 90's was because the personal income tax was raised under Bill Clinton? No. The economy was good in the late 90's because it coincided with the tech boom. There is no reason to believe that the economy wouldn't have been even better if there had been lower taxes.
Honestly, if earmarks are allowed, why in the hell wouldn't you use them? The primary job of a member of Congress is to bring as much federal money back to your district as possible. If that includes bridges to nowhere, earmarks, keeping useless military bases open, begging for federal disaster relief money, crying for federal assistance to first responders(which could have been paid for by the people of NYC if it was so necessary), or whatever other means. If you don't do it, you are just hurting the people in your district. And I don't find it hypocritical at all.
Hell I don't find the person getting food stamps that complains about food stamps to be a hypocrite either, nor do I feel the same way about people who own homes and receive a homestead exemption, who complain about the homestead exemption to be hypocrites either. Same with people calling for smaller government, while sending their kids to college with FAFSA. If its there you are stupid if you don't use it.
The tea party has been largely taken over by the neocons. And are being turned into the same old "right vs left" mud-throwers. Many jumped on the tea-party bandwagon without really understanding or agreeing with what it represents.
I like it, can't wait to kick out the WTO and the UN. Put up that fence at the border, and deport a bunch of people who are breaking our laws.
Your points clearly show a lack of knowledge regarding public policy and civic planning. Geriatrics, for example is a public problem. Not all families can cope with rising costs of healthcare and remain middle class. In fact, very few families can. Not to mention the idea you seem to have that the poor go to college for free. Colleges jack up rates not as racket, but due to LESS subsidies and funding overall.
What is your point about the USSR?
Michele Bachmann went on record denouncing earmarks.
You do want to raise taxes for those persons who are rich (esp. after the Bush tax cuts). Nobody is saying that the average family should have their taxes raised. Yes, lowering taxes is an impossibility...we have a deficit to get out of. Not to mention aging infrastructure.
Sarah Palin is a tea party representative.
The 90s also witnessed the dollar being stable. This was in huge part due to the surplus.
Some of the your other points really don't make sense.
I refuse to accept absurdity. Your proof is a spoof. You refer other posters who support your contention as plural which in itself is a substantiated fallacy.
Facts are facts. I don't accept fairy tales.
The reality is that you supported an absurd claim and can't provide even a shred of evidence to support it. That is the definition of irrational.
The typical response of the irrational that you've demonstrated when your non-falsifiable "truth" was challenged was to say essentially "Shut up!" and you see that as a sign of maturity. Perhaps in the fairy world that you've dreamed up and pretend to live in, it's a fact.
No we haven't met. You are simply an avatar that ceases to exist when I close the browser. Apparently I am of far more importance to you than you are to me. So I will close this window and move on. Feel free to go back to your cave and build a barrier to keep out reality so you may dwell in the tiny world of fear you've created for yourself.
If you don't fairly tales, then I suggest stop believing in your belief in the Tea party. Esp. on some irrelevant point.
Irrational? You're the one harping on the tea bagging name. MOVE ON! Nobody cares but you. Does it seem rational that you care about a marketing mistake that happened two years ago?
Mature? Sorry, but you named people. You aren't a model of maturity.
The rest of the post is absurd, irrational, illogical.
I suggest you get back on topic or stop posting. It's absurd that you care this much.
I know. Don't you just hate it when people point out the disparities of that exist in education, wealth, and health. I mean c'mon! I think that anyone that points out that our military spending accounts for nearly 50% of the total and our per capita health spending is the world's highest, yet we have the highest rates of uninsured in the first world should just move to Canada. They aren't real Americans. Clearly anyone that thinks that student debt has risen beyond the ability for the poor to enter into higher education is a nazi socialist communist. I almost forgot, the worst part. Anyone that believes that ALL persons should have the right to marry is a terrorist. Any form of equality is stupid. Why can't they just be thankful for their lives and not point out that not everyone had the same opportunities that they luckily had through no choice of their own.
I got to go, Fox News is on.
Nice caricature of an extreme wingnut. Perfect example that anybody who is patriotic in this country is considered a redneck or extreme right wing. It is not politically correct to love America, its politically correct to hate it.
Everybody should have free higher education? The workforce is so saturated with people with worthless degrees right now the bachelors degree is pretty much what a high school diploma was 20 years ago. I have a four year degree and cannot find a job in my field and probably never will. A lot of people are going through college today who really don't belong there. Its become an entitlement. Subsidizing college for all will be detrimental as it will get so a four year degree is required to work at Best Buy.
Gay marriage? How did that become involved in this again? What I said has nothing to do with whether or not gays should be able to get married. All I said is that if you can light up a skyscraper rainbow for gay pride then there should be nothing wrong with lighting up the same skyscraper in patriotic colors for July 4th. They won't do it though because that would be offensive. Its ironic that its more offensive and controversial to display patriotic colors which ALL Americans unite under than it is the rainbow flag which only represents ~5% of the population. By all means light it rainbow for gay pride but also light it for July 4th.
If you don't fairly tales, then I suggest stop believing in your belief in the Tea party. Esp. on some irrelevant point.
Irrational? You're the one harping on the tea bagging name. MOVE ON! Nobody cares but you. Does it seem rational that you care about a marketing mistake that happened two years ago?
Mature? Sorry, but you named people. You aren't a model of maturity.
The rest of the post is absurd, irrational, illogical.
I suggest you get back on topic or stop posting. It's absurd that you care this much.
Firstly, you assume too much. I've never been to a Tea Party nor supported the Tea Party. I will call BS when I see it though.
Still you have no proof, only your claims.
To be honest, I don't actually care at all. I just find it entertaining to push some people's buttons, particularly when they know they're full of it but try to build straw men to defend their own error. The bottom line is that unless you can substantiate your claim, you've got nothing. Unless you can actually prove your argument, you lose kiddo.
Nice caricature of an extreme wingnut. Perfect example that anybody who is patriotic in this country is considered a redneck or extreme right wing. It is not politically correct to love America, its politically correct to hate it.
Everybody should have free higher education? The workforce is so saturated with people with worthless degrees right now the bachelors degree is pretty much what a high school diploma was 20 years ago. I have a four year degree and cannot find a job in my field and probably never will. A lot of people are going through college today who really don't belong there. Subsidizing college for all will be detrimental as it will get so a four year degree is required to work at Best Buy.
Gay marriage? How did that become involved in this again? What I said has nothing to do with whether or not gays should be able to get married. All I said is that if you can light up a skyscraper rainbow for gay pride then there should be nothing wrong with lighting up the same skyscraper in patriotic colors for July 4th. They won't do it though because that would be offensive. Its ironic that its more offensive and controversial to display patriotic colors which ALL Americans unite under than it is the rainbow flag which only represents ~5% of the population.
I didn't make a caricature of a right wing nut. I simply rehashed the OP's points, which you disagree. I stated that the OP pointed out these disparities.
Not to mention the workforce isn't over saturated with degrees. The unemployment rate for those with bachelors degrees is significantly lower than those with only a high school diploma. If it were over saturated, the unemployment rate would be much higher. Compensation also would be lower.
20 years ago, 1991, the vast majority of Americans had a HSD...less than 30% of Americans have a bachelors, clearly they aren't the same. Subsidizing college will avert a potential debt crisis for the young.
I simply stated that you disagree with people that disagree with some American policies.
Again, nobody is saying that all Americans should unite under a rainbow flag btw. Also, nobody is saying that red white and blue is offensive. These are constructs in your mind.
If you feel I made a caricature because you vehemently disagree with what most people consider greater social ills than light displays, then that really is more telling of your position than mine.
Firstly, you assume too much. I've never been to a Tea Party nor supported the Tea Party. I will call BS when I see it though.
Still you have no proof, only your claims.
To be honest, I don't actually care at all. I just find it entertaining to push some people's buttons, particularly when they know they're full of it but try to build straw men to defend their own error. The bottom line is that unless you can substantiate your claim, you've got nothing. Unless you can actually prove your argument, you lose kiddo.
You clearly do care, kiddo. Your posts indicate an affinity towards the Tea Party, kiddo.
Not to mention the workforce isn't over saturated with degrees. The unemployment rate for those with bachelors degrees is significantly lower than those with only a high school diploma. If it were over saturated, the unemployment rate would be much higher. Compensation also would be lower.
20 years ago, 1991, the vast majority of Americans had a HSD...less than 30% of Americans have a bachelors, clearly they aren't the same. Subsidizing college will avert a potential debt crisis for the young.
Disagree completely. When 60-70% of this generation has a four-year degree, do you think it will be as valuable? Right now, specialized degrees from reputable schools combined with several years of internship experience is what is in demand. Your average business or liberal arts degree from McCollege(TM) will land you a management position at Wal-Mart if you are lucky. Instead of subsidizing college, hold high schools to a higher standard. Most students could learn a lot of the things they learn taking these general education programs while still in high school.
They teabagged the white house, kiddo. This is one of MANY sources. Stop your obsession, kiddo, of an irrelevant point.
FINALLY You presented evidence. Was that so hard?
The video that was earlier presented as evidence was fake. That if you recall was what I called BS on. I've been living in your head rent free for 3 days now.
But I do have to admit that you did eventually decide to back up your claim and for that I'll give you credit. However, it's clear I got under your skin and you allowed your rage to overpower your reason.
I still think you're brainwashed and partisan but at least you have begun to exhibit the ability to debate somewhat rationally rather than throwing the typical liberal hissy-fit. There's hope for you yet...kiddo.
The video that was earlier presented as evidence was fake. That if you recall was what I called BS on. I've been living in your head rent free for 3 days now.
But I do have to admit that you did eventually decide to back up your claim and for that I'll give you credit. However, it's clear I got under your skin and you allowed your rage to overpower your reason.
I still think you're brainwashed and partisan but at least you have begun to exhibit the ability to debate somewhat rationally rather than throwing the typical liberal hissy-fit. There's hope for you yet...kiddo.
What is your deal? I stated that there is too much evidence to cite properly. Everyone said, you can look for it yourself to determine. Not to mention, the original video WAS A REAL TEA PARTY MEMBER.
I voted republican in 2004...yes in '04. I originally wanted McCain to win the election in 2000. I voted Obama in '08. I'm really not partisan. Not to mention that I formerly wrote articles for College Republicans on my campus. I really am more of a policy nut (I like facts and figures and how to make America better) than an ideologue.
You do realize the point of the thread isn't about the Tea Party movement.
You didn't get under my skin; I just thought it was stupid and childish and really wondered how a functional adult could not understand that this has no bearing or significance to anything. It was like seeing a train wreck. Nobody wants it to occur, but when it does it draws in people like moths. You drew me in. Your loaded arguments and clearly biased views of the world drew me in.
A debate usually stays on topic and deals with issues that are relevant. This wasn't relevant. If you feel that there is 'hope' for me yet, then I failed somewhere along the line.
Disagree completely. When 60-70% of this generation has a four-year degree, do you think it will be as valuable? Right now, specialized degrees from reputable schools combined with several years of internship experience is what is in demand. Your average business or liberal arts degree from McCollege(TM) will land you a management position at Wal-Mart if you are lucky. Instead of subsidizing college, hold high schools to a higher standard. Most students could learn a lot of the things they learn taking these general education programs while still in high school.
60-70% of this generation DOES NOT have a four year degree. A management position at Target with a four year degree straight out of college is between 30-45k (depending on the department). I applied to Target for a management position.
Holding high schools to higher standards is not mutually exclusive with cheap college. Actually, they're pretty complimentary.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
