Are liberals more compassionate? (minimum wage, generation, weapon, extremist)
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.
As someone who works with, and mingles with, some insanely wealthy people due to work, I've found that wealthy folks who've relied on public assistance while growing-up (food assistance, Pell grants, etc.), tend to care deeply about keeping these programs going. On the other hand, the folks who seemingly grew-up the suburbs without these concerns feel as though people relying on these things need to get a job (not all, of course). And then, the folks who grew-up very wealthy tend to be split, for reasons that I can't determine in a work environment.
I relied on federal loans/grants to get through my schooling, so when I hear conservative politicians speak of reducing/ending those programs I cringe. I can't imagine my life without access to college, and I never could have gone without Pell grants and Stafford loans.
Especially when some of those so-called conservative politicians benefitted from the VERY SAME PROGRAMS they are now against. "I got mine - too bad for you'. AKA Marco Rubio. Remember him?
Because none of us are worth that much When you have so much money that you don't know what to do with it..... why not give a few morsels to the underprivileged. My family doesn't make that much but I always give what I can to charity. Where are the accolades for people like me.
I talking about people in office, not us peasants! Check out just how kind Romney is compared to yours truly...........notice what a BIG spender Biden is along with President Obama SMALL amount......as he stands and preaches about caring for the poor
So what were the headlines? He raked in about $42 million in 2010 and 2011. His effective tax rate was just below 14 percent, lower than that for many American taxpayers. He paid $6.2 million to the taxman and donated a staggering $7 million to charity, including $4.1 million to the Mormon church.
OK, so Mormons are supposed to tithe 10 percent of their income. But it's to Romney's immense credit that he promised to do this in his youth and followed through with that - to the tune of scores of millions (maybe hundreds of millions) of dollars throughout his life.
In fact, in those two years, he paid 16 percent of his income to charity, compared to, er, 2.6 percent by Newt Gingrich.
And what about President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden in the run-up to their 2008 campaign?
USA Today broke it down here. In 2007, the Obamas gave more than $240,000 to charity, about 5.7 percent of their income. The Bidens gave an average of $369 to charity a year for the decade before he moved to the Naval Observatory - about 0.3 percent of their income. Back in 1997, then veep Al Gore and his then wife Tipper gave $353.
Since becoming veep, Biden hasn't become much more generous. In 2010, he gave $5,350, about 1.4 percent of income. That same year, Romney gave some $3 million. The national average is about three percent.
Almost every dime of those millions of dollars went to the Mormon church. The church builds more churches, buys radio stations, newspapers, shopping malls and vast tracts of farmland where they grow food for the coming Apocalypse. Hardly any of that charity money went to helping the poor, the sick, the infirm, the hungry or the disenfranchised.
Now, maybe that counts as charity in your book, but it doesn't in mine.
THe Mormon church has the biggest outreach to poor of any organization.......
And even if it didn't all go to charity........how do you explain Uncle Joe's 369 dollars.....
You attacked Romney's giving but didn't even address Biden's non-giving.
The New York Times reported in July 2008 that Rangel rents four apartments at below-market rates in the Lenox Terrace complex in Harlem. It reported that Rangel paid $3,894 monthly for all four apartments in 2007. In contrast, the landlord's going rate for similar apartments in the building was as high as $8,125 monthly. Three adjacent apartments were combined to create his 2,500-square-foot (230 m2) home. A fourth unit is used as a campaign office, which violates city and state regulations that require rent-stabilized apartments to be used as a primary residence. Rangel received thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from one of the landlord’s, according to the paper. Rangel said his rent does not affect his representation of his constituents.
Congressional ethics experts said the difference in rent between what Rangel was paying and market rates, an estimated $30,000 per year, could be construed as a gift, exceeding the $100 House of Representatives gift limit. In late July, the House voted 254–138 to table a resolution by Republican Minority Leader John Boehner that would have censured Rangel for having "dishonored himself and brought discredit to the House", by occupying the four apartments.
Apartments that "real" families could have lived in............
Especially when some of those so-called conservative politicians benefitted from the VERY SAME PROGRAMS they are now against. "I got mine - too bad for you'. AKA Marco Rubio. Remember him?
The email, sent out by the Dallas County Community College District, informed students of the changes to the Pell Grant program. It revealed that the number of semesters a student could receive a Pell Grant had been cut from 18 semesters down to 12. It is a detail likely unknown to most students; in fact, the cut in grants has gone largely unreported by the media.
The email states that the cut in eligibility was part of an education bill President Obama signed into law in 2011. "On December 23, 2011, President Obama signed into law the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012 (Public Law 112-74). This new federal law states that the amount of Federal Pell Grant funds a student may receive over his or her LIFETIME will be reduced to the duration of a student's eligibility from 18 semesters (or its equivalent) to 12 semesters (or its equivalent). This new law applies to ALL Federal Pell Grant eligible students effective with the 2012-2013 award year beginning July 1, 2012. (DCL-GEN-12-01)"
This cut in eligibility was never mentioned by President Obama during the campaign, and when he boasted about increasing funding to the Pell Grant program, CNN fact-checked his claim as true. While the amount of government funding to the program is going up in future years, CNN failed miserably by not pointing out the cuts in eligibility to students. The cuts could be a rude awakening to students who thought President Obama was expanding their educational opportunities.
The cut in grant eligibility has serious ramifications for non-traditional students. Part-time students who do not receive a full semester grant may lose out on funds if they do not earn an undergraduate degree within 12 semesters. Adults who go back to school, including retraining for a new career, will also have limited access to grants.
Since liberal ideology is geared to help the unfortunate, does it mean liberals themselves are more compassionate?
I used to think that both liberalism and conservatism were compassionate in their own ways, but after seeing what passes for true conservatism in this country, I've got to say that liberalism is more compassionate. Never met more heartless meaner folks than Tea Partiers. (They're the "true" conservatives, you know)
That said, there are plenty of center right people (aka RINO's, to use conservative/tea party lexicon) who are decent and give to the poor of their own accord. They just think private charity is better, but don't think government help should be eliminated altogether.
But those people aren't "true" conservatives anymore.
Especially when some of those so-called conservative politicians benefitted from the VERY SAME PROGRAMS they are now against. "I got mine - too bad for you'. AKA Marco Rubio. Remember him?
I remember the liberal rhetoric about it. But that's all it is. Lies.
Liberals want higher taxes. But they can voluntarily contribute money to the federal government. They don't.
Rubio is no different. He followed the law as it was written at the time. Now he wants to change the law. It's no different than liberals not voluntarily paying the higher taxes now while they want to raise them.
How sad for you then. Your priority is money and prosperity....talk about a true republican
Do Democrats run for office promising less prosperity? I always thought prosperity was a bipartisan goal? Are you arguing Democrats prefer people remain poor? I have seen Republicans make that argument. Seldom seen a Democrat agree with it before.
I remember the liberal rhetoric about it. But that's all it is. Lies.
Liberals want higher taxes. But they can voluntarily contribute money to the federal government. They don't.
Rubio is no different. He followed the law as it was written at the time. Now he wants to change the law. It's no different than liberals not voluntarily paying the higher taxes now while they want to raise them.
Well, is it all LIES or not? Did or did not Rubio benefit from some of the very programs he now wants to remove?
On the one hand you say it's liberal lies and on the other you say 'Rubio is no different'.
Which is it?
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.
When you have so much money that you don't know what to do with it..... why not give a few morsels to the underprivileged. My family doesn't make that much but I always give what I can to charity. Where are the accolades for people like me.
Check out just how kind Romney is compared to yours truly...........notice what a BIG spender Biden is along with President Obama SMALL amount......as he stands and preaches about caring for the poor 
