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.
Overspending would end in a New Hampshire second if we taxed the money out of the top 10% instead of borrowing it from them and our biggest financial enemies the Mideast petroleum cartels and the cutthroat Chinese monopolists.
Overspending would end in a New Hampshire second if we taxed the money out of the top 10% instead of borrowing it from them and our biggest financial enemies the Mideast petroleum cartels and the cutthroat Chinese monopolists.
This would be at the center of my campaign.
Is it the wealthy that are really driving all of the overspending on entitlements?
A cold-hearted, callous President is what we need if we are to ever get this economy fixed and our national debt eliminated.
One who will say:
- The taxpayers don't care about your pet project, Senator, and neither do I.
- I sympathize with your terminally sick father, but life is not fair. Taxpayers can't afford to keep him alive for the next 12 months just to make you happy.
- I understand that you want to flee your country for a better life in America. But taxpayers cannot afford your burden.
- I understand, Mr. Businiess, that your company is in trouble. But taxpayers are not to fault for your bad business decisions.
- I understand, Cabinet Secretary, that you'd like to give your staff across the board raises. Taxpayers are not concerned, and neither am I.
- I understand, Governor, that your state has degenerated into a Nanny State. I will not sign any legislation that provides you a bailout. Cut government and cut services. That's my advice to you.
Yes, its time to make this nation suffer a bit of hardship to get back to our roots and our principals.
9% Unemployment should not be enough to put a nation on its knees economically. Period. What that means is that our government has failed us by epic proportions.
Will we get out of this ditch? No, I don't think we will. We've devolved into a Welfare Nation, and its irreversible.
But you can be sure that i'll vote for the first cold-hearted, callous Presidential candidate that is willing to give it a try, that's for sure.
This is too simplistic of a way to look at it. The economic is more complex than just cutting funds. In order to have a good strong economy you need money to flow. Unemployed people can't buy things and pay off bills. Essentially, you want us to weaken our dollar and make things worst inorder to make it better? The President isn't even responsible for half the stuff you listed.
Is it the wealthy that are really driving all of the overspending on entitlements?
"Entitlements", meaning money owed with no 'means-testing', has recipients in all wealth categories.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYChistorygal
Welfare was not created for the old and sick - that's social security. Welfare is necessary, but needs to be tightened up so people don't spend their entire lives on it.
It's especially needed now, with so many of us out of work or underemployed.
The problem of people being on welfare for life was fixed during the Clinton administration.
This is too simplistic of a way to look at it. The economic is more complex than just cutting funds. In order to have a good strong economy you need money to flow. Unemployed people can't buy things and pay off bills. Essentially, you want us to weaken our dollar and make things worst inorder to make it better? The President isn't even responsible for half the stuff you listed.
It's the other way around...your view is too simplistic. First, the President holds the veto pen. He can veto every/any piece of legislation that makes it to his desk. This is de facto policy-making in action. If he won't sign it, then it won't make it to his desk to begin with if he lets that fact be known. Second, if the candidate that i'm speaking of is elected on this platform, he's likely to get more of what he wants. And if not, then he can take it to the people and call out every Congressman/woman by name who is obstructing his policy of eliminating the debt. Third, i'm talking a seismic change in the American way of handling taxpayer dollars. I'm talking about someone who demands this change, not wishes for it. I disagree with you simply because you'd rather keep the status quo then actually seek the change this nation needs.
This isn't 2007. The Tea Party was originally started to promote the conservative principles of limited government and low taxes, but now it has become a haven for far-right individuals of all stripes. Anti-immigrant activists, nativists, oil millionaires, anti-environmentalists, neo-fascists, wealthy fiscal conservatives, neo-Confederates, staunch corporatists, racist groups, morality-based social conservatives, conspiracy theorists and just garden-variety Republicans all call the Tea Party home. The TP is now a far-right lobbying force, nothing more or less.
Personally, I believe that neither limited government nor low taxes are feasible in today's world. Economic and social realities call for more government intervention and services, which require taxation to operate. However, because of our national debt, we can't afford to immediately implement the full range of social programs I would like to see started. In the short term, I think we should focus on eliminating the national debt, getting universal healthcare and propping up the safety net for the unemployed and disabled.
You don't believe limited government and low taxes is the way to go??? How well has high taxes and big government worked previously?
oh this time it will work, hmm it didn't
well maybe this time hmm it didn't
well maybe ......
Wake up!
lol Your depiction of the tea party is a joke, but that is the case when looks at things through blinders as this silly post does. Remember when you can't discuss the issues make things up about the other side.
What right-wing website did you get that information from?
The fact is, fascism and Nazism are NOT socialism . . . despite the name. They are forms of extreme conservatism. Also, feudalism and absolute monarchy are forms of conservatism, but I haven't brought them into this discussion. This thread is about reasonable American politics, not Nazis or communists.
As an ardent admirer of Marx, Benito Mussolini (1883-1945) called his version of Marxist socialism "Fascism" Instead of nationalization--government ownership--of private business, Mussolini advocated government control of business via complete bureaucratic regulation.
""Fascism is a system in which the government leaves nominal ownership of the means of production in the hands of private individuals but exercises control by means of regulatory legislation and reaps most of the profit by means of heavy taxation. In effect, fascism is simply a more subtle form of government ownership than is socialism."" Mussolini
its still a child of the grandpappy called marxism
marxism, socialism, communism, fascism, progressivism, liberalism...all part of the same family
"As things stand today, the trade unions in my opinion cannot be dispensed with. On the contrary, they are among the most important institutions of the nation's economic life. Their significance lies not only in the social and political field, but even more in the general field of national politics. A people whose broad masses, through a sound trade-union movement, obtain the satisfaction of their living requirements and at the same time an education, will be tremendously strengthened in its power of resistance in the struggle for existence".
sounds like something pelosi would say...yet it was hitler who said it
Fascist Italy had in the thirties what was arguably the most comprehensive welfare State in the world at that time, in fact, that Italian Fascism was noticeably closer to Communism than Nazism was. This is not only because of the influence of Marxism on Mussolini's ideology but because Mussolini's nationalism was sentimental and nostalgic rather than the intellectual and ideological nationalism of Hitler. Thus it is primarily the degree of ideological focus on nationalism that distinguishes the three forms of authoritarian socialism: Nazism, Fascism and Communism.
The Socialist party reaffirms its eternal faith in the future of the Workers' International, destined to bloom again, greater and stronger, from the blood and conflagration of peoples. It is in the name of the International and of Socialism that we invite you, proletarians of Italy, to uphold your unshakeable opposition to war". Musilini
“Even with Europe in decay, still a war should have roused the healthy elements; a war should have awakened a lot of hidden powers, and surely so much energy would have been present among 250 million people that at least a respectable battle would have occurred, in which both parties could have reaped some honor, as much honor as courage and bravery can gain on the battlefield.” carl marx
And if Marx was not a Leftist, who would be? Mussolini's "Fascist" ideas were in fact Marxist, and hence Leftist.
"A Marxist begins with his prime truth that all evils are caused by the exploitation of the proletariat by the capitalists. From this he logically proceeds to the revolution to end capitalism, then into the third stage of reorganization into a new social order of the dictatorship of the proletariat, and finally the last stage -- the political paradise of communism." Saul alinski
these are direct quotes (and credited to the authors(as in no copy write problem))
the history is there, just because you dont like that people like mussilini and hitler tarnished the name of progressives, doesnt mean it didnt happen
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.
