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.
Yes, and the alternative is to also get the lazy bums off of their butts and make them contribute instead of leeching off of the government. I know jobs can be hard to come by right now, but how much common sense does it take to do the math: I don't have a job, I don't have any marketable job skills, I sit on my butt all day, I already have a child, I definitely should not be having any more to add to the burden that I am on the government and the decent, hardworking tax payers who support me. Oh, and thanks, thanks for supporting me. I really appreciate it. I will do my best to show my appreciation by not using my Bridge Card to buy useless items like popsicles and Mountain Dew and my welfare check to buy beer, cigarettes, and illegal street drugs.
If more people were forced to contribute to the system instead of draining it, that would make a huge difference. You didn't hear about things like staggeringly out of control national debt before America became a welfare state with more people taking than giving. Most people who would be considered wealthy worked hard to get what they have, and they have a right to reap the rewards of their hard work. Others who don't have as much and are jealous of their success want to even the playing field and "spread the wealth". Socialism at its worst.
Your compassion is underwhelming, and your broad brush painting is small-minded at best.
"Socialism" is a laughable, ignorant buzzword used by people who don't know socialism from marxism from Darwinism.
My post said EVERYONE should pay more. Look up the definition of "everyone" because that includes the people you brushed with that holier-than-thou broad brush of yours.
It's bad enough to be poor without people like you inspecting what other people buy at the grocery store. I would dare say you have never personally witnessed such behavior and are parroting what callers are saying on the various right wing talk shows.
Last edited by AlohaHuey; 02-17-2011 at 10:25 AM..
Yeah, right. If you think that a balanced budget can be achieved by cutting discretionary spending, well, I have a bridge to sell you. It cannot be done. Cutting and tax increases are inevitable; a high school economics class could tell you that.
It dpeneds on how you define discretionary spending. They are going to have to change the laws to allow governments to declare bankruptcy and get out of promises that they never should have made and cannot keep. They are going to have to cut massively and turn a lot of things back over to private support, or let them go. Even items that are identified as non-discretionary items will have to be cut.
In addition they may have to increase taxes. However they are not going to solve any problems by increasing taxes. Our economy has recessed. There is less money. Higher taxes on less money will not get them any more money than they had before. It will just stem the losses. they must cut, cut, and then cut some more.
Many of the programs that the government now handles are luxury type programs. Things not normally provided by governments. Further, an immense amount of moeny is spent by the government in a futile effort trying to make things "fair" for everyone and trying to get people to think the way the government wants them to. There is no money for that now. The government needs to stick with defense, police protection, infrastructure/sanitation, trade, basic education, and justice. The other stuff was a nice try. Now we have no more money for further trying. It is time to give up some of the government control before they find themselves unable to provide the basics and we are overrun with crime, sewage, impassible roads, and no public school or absoultely horrible public schools that only the poor will attend.
Maybe they should just get out of education altogether. The government really does nto do a very good job with it anymore. The bureaucracy has overwhelmed he teaching.
In the past, they either borrowed, or just waited it out until the economy took off again. Now, many governments do not dare borrow much more or their bond rating will decay to junk status. Waiting it out is not likely to work becasue the economy is expected to continue to trickle back to life, not take off like it has in the past.
There is no magic mantra that is going to resolve this problem. "Tax the rich" is a great battle cry, but it will not generate the funds needed even if it coudl succeed, and it never does. Tax the rich translates to tax the upper middle class. The rich are always able to avoid taxes to a certain extent and that will nto change. You cannot tax Warren Buffet if he moves his assets to a country that will tax him less, or if he modifies his businesses so that he has little or no income. Besides, even if they took 100% of Waren Buffet's liquid assets and 100% of Bill Gate's liquid assets, it would not solve anything. The expenditure of many times that amount did nothing at all. Nearly every government is still broke and headed to bankruptcy (some are already bankrupt).
It dpeneds on how you define discretionary spending. They are going to have to change the laws to allow governments to declare bankruptcy and get out of promises that they never should have made and cannot keep. They are going to have to cut massively and turn a lot of things back over to private support, or let them go. Even items that are identified as non-discretionary items will have to be cut.
In addition they may have to increase taxes. However they are not going to solve any problems by increasing taxes. Our economy has recessed. There is less money. Higher taxes on less money will not get them any more money than they had before. It will just stem the losses. they must cut, cut, and then cut some more.
Many of the programs that the government now handles are luxury type programs. Things not normally provided by governments. Further, an immense amount of moeny is spent by the government in a futile effort trying to make things "fair" for everyone and trying to get people to think the way the government wants them to. There is no money for that now. The government needs to stick with defense, police protection, infrastructure/sanitation, trade, basic education, and justice. The other stuff was a nice try. Now we have no more money for further trying. It is time to give up some of the government control before they find themselves unable to provide the basics and we are overrun with crime, sewage, impassible roads, and no public school or absoultely horrible public schools that only the poor will attend.
Maybe they should just get out of education altogether. The government really does nto do a very good job with it anymore. The bureaucracy has overwhelmed he teaching.
In the past, they either borrowed, or just waited it out until the economy took off again. Now, many governments do not dare borrow much more or their bond rating will decay to junk status. Waiting it out is not likely to work becasue the economy is expected to continue to trickle back to life, not take off like it has in the past.
There is no magic mantra that is going to resolve this problem. "Tax the rich" is a great battle cry, but it will not generate the funds needed even if it coudl succeed, and it never does. Tax the rich translates to tax the upper middle class. The rich are always able to avoid taxes to a certain extent and that will nto change. You cannot tax Warren Buffet if he moves his assets to a country that will tax him less, or if he modifies his businesses so that he has little or no income. Besides, even if they took 100% of Waren Buffet's liquid assets and 100% of Bill Gate's liquid assets, it would not solve anything. The expenditure of many times that amount did nothing at all. Nearly every government is still broke and headed to bankruptcy (some are already bankrupt).
Geezus, are you even reading my posts? I am saying EVERYONE has to pay more and the rich should pay their fair share, and more than the middle class and the poor. NOBODY is suggesting taking 100% of ANYONE'S ASSETS.
You can amend the laws that currently allow offshoring of assets, a HELL of a lot easier than allowing the government to declare bankruptcy!
Final time: A high school economics class could tell you that cutting spending WILL NOT erase the deficit. Not even close. EVERYONE WILL HAVE TO PAY MORE. Get used to it.
Your compassion is underwhelming, and your broad brush painting is small-minded at best.
"Socialism" is a laughable, ignorant buzzword used by people who don't know socialism from marxism from Darwinism.
My post said EVERYONE should pay more. Look up the definition of "everyone" because that includes the people you brushed with that holier-than-thou broad brush of yours.
It's bad enough to be poor without people like you inspecting what other people buy at the grocery store. I would dare say you have never personally witnessed such behavior and are parroting what callers are saying on the various right wing talk shows.
If someone uses my paycheck to buy their groceries, then yeah, I feel that I have the right to see what they are buying. To assume that I haven't witnessed this behavior first hand is presumptuous and arrogant. I don't watch or listen to any talk shows. I am too busy working and taking care of my family. I happen to live in a small town with a disproportionate number of irresponsible, lazy people, and YES, I witnessed just last week at our local Kroger a couple of women buying a bunch of two liters of Mountain Dew and a couple of boxes of popsicles with their Bridge Card and then proceeding to get out cash to buy brand name cigarettes at over $6 a pack. As a hardworking, taxpaying citizen, I have a problem with that, and rightfully so. Just when did it become my responsibility to provide for everyone who feels that work is beneath them and having babies out of wedlock and on the public dole is their birthright? There's nothing lacking in my compassion, what's lacking is a work ethic and a standard of right and wrong in people like this. I have compassion for people who can't work because they are TRULY disabled in some way and have no problem contributing to their support, but being lazy and depending on the government to be a daddy to your children and provide you with junk food and cigarettes has become a lifestyle for far too many people. Sorry if you don't like dealing in the truth, which judging by your posts, you probably don't, since it sounds like you've been drinking the Kool-aid of the far left for a while now.
I'm done here. I have better, more productive things to do than sit here and bicker with you. Hopefully you do too.
Aloha, Huey.
Last edited by canudigit; 02-17-2011 at 11:10 AM..
If someone uses my paycheck to buy their groceries, then yeah, I feel that I have the right to see what they are buying. To assume that I haven't witnessed this behavior first hand is presumptuous and arrogant. I don't watch or listen to any talk shows. I am too busy working and taking care of my family. I happen to live in a small town with a disproportionate number of irresponsible, lazy people, and YES, I witnessed just last week at our local Kroger a couple of women buying a bunch of two liters of Mountain Dew and a couple of boxes of popsicles with their Bridge Card and then proceeding to get out cash to buy brand name cigarettes at over $6 a pack. As a hardworking, taxpaying citizen, I have a problem with that, and rightfully so. Just when did it become my responsibility to provide for everyone who feels that work is beneath them and having babies out of wedlock and on the public dole is their birthright? There's nothing lacking in my compassion, what's lacking is a work ethic and a standard of right and wrong in people like this. I have compassion for people who can't work because they are TRULY disabled in some way and have no problem contributing to their support, but being lazy and depending on the government to be a daddy to your children and provide you with junk food and cigarettes has become a lifestyle for far too many people. Sorry if you don't like dealing in the truth, which judging by your posts, you probably don't, since it sounds like you've been drinking the Kool-aid of the far left for a while now.
I'm done here. You are more to be pitied than censored, and I have better, more productive things to do than sit here and bicker with you. Hopefully you do too.
Aloha, Huey.
It's profoundly judgemental to watch people's buying habits. You don't have anything better to do than to snoop out what people buy and what they use to pay for their purchases? I have to laugh at the supposed "Christian" nation that hates the poor so. It's a magical power that you can determine from a grocery line who is lazy and who is actually trying.
I would hate to be you, full of fizzing anger at people's buying habits at the local grocery or their birthing habits (*which you must have some additional magical sense to detect unwed parents). Your small-minded generalizations befit the small town in whcih you reside. Your generalizations about my politics are laughable; typical of the blather found on right wing talk radio. For someone who claims not to listen, you're a perfect parrot. So I drink the left wing Kool-Aid because I factually point out that Warren Buffett and those in his tax bracket pay only 12% in taxes and should pay the 38% befitting his tax bracket? Something Buffett admits should be the case? Laughing My Aloha A** Off.
Last edited by AlohaHuey; 02-17-2011 at 11:24 AM..
I love when people bring up the top % pay x% of taxes. The top 2% in the country own 50% of the wealth.
I'm curious what freedoms do we lose if we are socialists? What freedoms do Americans have that Canadians don't? What freedoms have the Germans, French, British lost?
The freedom (hypothetically) to buy businesses that I can't actually afford.
It's profoundly judgemental to watch people's buying habits. You don't have anything better to do than to snoop out what people buy and what they use to pay for their purchases? I have to laugh at the supposed "Christian" nation that hates the poor so. It's a magical power that you can determine from a grocery line who is lazy and who is actually trying.
I would hate to be you, full of fizzing anger at people's buying habits at the local grocery or their birthing habits (*which you must have some additional magical sense to detect unwed parents). Your small-minded generalizations befit the small town in whcih you reside. Your generalizations about my politics are laughable; typical of the blather found on right wing talk radio. For someone who claims not to listen, you're a perfect parrot. So I drink the left wing Kool-Aid because I factually point out that Warren Buffett and those in his tax bracket pay only 12% in taxes and should pay the 38% befitting his tax bracket? Something Buffett admits should be the case? Laughing My Aloha A** Off.
Memo to AH, we are NOT a "Christian" nation. The rich pay plenty in taxes, I don't know how you determine what is "fair". I don't care what they have, I try not to be envious of them. Sure, I don't necessarily like their arrogance sometimes but I appreciate that most of them have found a way to build wealth and help create even more wealth, like Buffet. Not all of them are silver spoon heirs. NO one has an obligation to "pay more" than the law declares but I'm glad you and your ilk has deemed yourself judge and jury as to what is fair. Good luck implementing your takeover of America's wealth!
Geezus, are you even reading my posts? I am saying EVERYONE has to pay more and the rich should pay their fair share, and more than the middle class and the poor. NOBODY is suggesting taking 100% of ANYONE'S ASSETS.
You can amend the laws that currently allow offshoring of assets, a HELL of a lot easier than allowing the government to declare bankruptcy!
Final time: A high school economics class could tell you that cutting spending WILL NOT erase the deficit. Not even close. EVERYONE WILL HAVE TO PAY MORE. Get used to it.
The federal deficit will never be erased but cutting spending will certainly help avoid it GROWING any more than it has.
Memo to AH, we are NOT a "Christian" nation. The rich pay plenty in taxes, I don't know how you determine what is "fair". I don't care what they have, I try not to be envious of them. Sure, I don't necessarily like their arrogance sometimes but I appreciate that most of them have found a way to build wealth and help create even more wealth, like Buffet. Not all of them are silver spoon heirs. NO one has an obligation to "pay more" than the law declares but I'm glad you and your ilk has deemed yourself judge and jury as to what is fair. Good luck implementing your takeover of America's wealth!
My diagnoisis: Cranial-rectal fusion. You clearly have reading comprehension issues.
We ARE a Christian nation. Over 75% identify themselves as such. effin' DUH.
I said EVERYONE HAS TO PAY MORE and expect less to reduce the deficit, and the wealthy should pay more because they have more. "Takeover of America's wealth" is so laughably wrong, it shows you have zero ability to stay on topic.
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.
