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.
Agreed. Not all Dems/Liberals want to grow government, though. You won't believe this, but it's true.
I believe in smart restructuring of existing programs and re-tasking of existing staff. If we could all work together, we might accomplish this and even be able to do some trimming.
Liberal activists often run their organizations on a shoestring. An admitted flaw in the thinking is that while we can function fine this way, the government has to be huge. I happen to think that's ridiculous. We have all seen that bigger is not better. Smarter is better, and with co-operation, we could take ideas from both sides and make changes that benefit everyone while not offending Conservative fiscal principles. At the local level nationwide are Liberal-minded programs with Conservative fiscal approaches, that persist by encouraging personal responsibility. With work, smart people of all stripes could incorporate these approaches at the federal level.
It would take one major concession on each side...Libs would have to stop seeing government money as an inexhaustible resource, and Cons would have to be willing to see past stereotypes about the poor. We have to be willing to teach each other, though, not lecture. And we'd have to be willing to learn from each other, not scoff. It could work if we wanted it to. Most of our problems, including this shutdown/debt ceiling mess, are about political will. Everybody wants everything and nobody's happy.
Weak and poor people will let their government walk all over them. How do you weaken people? Policies that will hurt them financially essentially making them poor and disparate. Desperation enough to believe anyone who tells them they care when in fact they are being used to further the agenda. This is how Hitler gained control, Hitler also created an enemy to blame.
Of the groups poor, middle class, upper class, rich, which group understands personal finance the most and which group has the least understanding? The group who is most desperate typically a result of having the least understanding will be the easiest to take advantage of and manipulate just as this president did. Remember "Hope & Change"?
A president who knowingly exploits people to pit one group of Americans against another empowering government to take more money from the American people is a president I can not support. This is where I was middle moved right.
It would take one major concession on each side...Libs would have to stop seeing government money as an inexhaustible resource, and Cons would have to be willing to see past stereotypes about the poor. We have to be willing to teach each other, though, not lecture. And we'd have to be willing to learn from each other, not scoff. It could work if we wanted it to. Most of our problems, including this shutdown/debt ceiling mess, are about political will. Everybody wants everything and nobody's happy.
Libs must first understand that it is not government money. It is money that people who work hard to earn. Being forced to pay too much will make them poor. Making one group poor to "supposedly" give to the poor is ridiculous and not the solution.
Agreed. Not all Dems/Liberals want to grow government, though. You won't believe this, but it's true.
Of course I don't believe it. If they don't believe in massive government, they're not liberals.
Quote:
I believe in smart restructuring of existing programs and re-tasking of existing staff. If we could all work together, we might accomplish this and even be able to do some trimming.
Re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic was not an effective means of improving the long-term future.
Quote:
Liberal activists often run their organizations on a shoestring.
LOL, that's NOT TRUE. Liberals have a whole flock of unbelievably rich guys, who collectively donate billions to buy all these activists.
Quote:
An admitted flaw in the thinking is that while we can function fine this way, the government has to be huge.
Nonsense. Your premise is wrong. Liberals believe in big government because - as they so eloquently demonstrate here - they believe themselves entitled to control the individual for the collective good. Not just "entitled", as in "an earned privilege", but "a moral imperative" to control the people for their own good.
Quote:
I happen to think that's ridiculous.
Of course it is. Collectivism is utterly daft.
Quote:
We have all seen that bigger is not better. Smarter is better, and with co-operation, we could take ideas from both sides and make changes that benefit everyone while not offending Conservative fiscal principles.
Wrong. You're making the mistake of thinking this is about money. Liberals are all about money. I am all about INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM, RESPONSIBILITY, and AUTONOMY. The only legitimate reason for government to exist at all, is to defend and promote those things.
Quote:
At the local level nationwide are Liberal-minded programs with Conservative fiscal approaches, that persist by encouraging personal responsibility. With work, smart people of all stripes could incorporate these approaches at the federal level.
NOTHING needs to be done at the federal level. Let the people be stupid with their states, if they wish. Not force it on everyone.
Quote:
It would take one major concession on each side...Libs would have to stop seeing government money as an inexhaustible resource, and Cons would have to be willing to see past stereotypes about the poor. We have to be willing to teach each other, though, not lecture. And we'd have to be willing to learn from each other, not scoff. It could work if we wanted it to. Most of our problems, including this shutdown/debt ceiling mess, are about political will. Everybody wants everything and nobody's happy.
One thing most all of us have in common is a general and growing frustration with gridlock and ineffectiveness in our government.
Why do you think this seems to be polarizing us further as opposed to pushing us more towards the center?
I'm not naive...I have my own thoughts, but would like to hear yours.
We have a political establishment in Washington, consisting of politicians, bureaucrats, lobbyists, journalists and members of the news media. Most of these people live out the vast majority of their adult lives in a revolving door, that leads in and out of the Washington, Beltway bubble.
Our federal governmental process has become nothing more to them, then a giant game of political brinkmanship. They fight their little partisan battles, not to do the work for the people, but to one-up their opponents. The only time the concerns of the people are even acknowledged, is when these concerns can be played off in another battle to win one for their side.
When the members of the news media are not currently serving in government, they report on the partisan political game, to score points for their side, in hopes of getting invited back into the revolving door to serve inside the government again, and become an active member in the games.
Many of the big names in the news media are either married to bureaucrats and politicians working inside government, or they have siblings who are, or they used to be work colleagues with the people in government.
We also have senators who's children who work as lobbyist. Harry Reid for instance, you know, the man who said he had a secret informant that told us that Romney makes more than we know.
Liberals believe in big government because - as they so eloquently demonstrate here - they believe themselves entitled to control the individual for the collective good. Not just "entitled", as in "an earned privilege", but "a moral imperative" to control the people for their own good.
This is how Hillary sees the American people <helpless, not knowing any better>
“We just can't trust the American people to make those types of choices. Government has to make those choices for people.”
― Hilary Rodham Clinton
And she aims to gain as much power as possible to tell us what we need.
“The only way to make a difference is to acquire power.”
― Hilary Rodham Clinton
Wrong. You're making the mistake of thinking this is about money. Liberals are all about money. I am all about INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM, RESPONSIBILITY, and AUTONOMY. The only legitimate reason for government to exist at all, is to defend and promote those things.
Liberals are all about taking money from the people to achieve power over the people. It's that simple.
Quote:
We have all seen that bigger is not better. Smarter is better, and with co-operation, we could take ideas from both sides and make changes that benefit everyone while not offending Conservative fiscal principles.
Yep, bigger is NOT better. Ask a person who works for a big corporation. Liberals complain about how big corporations don't care but then those same people are ready to hand it all over to big bureaucratic government. Amazing that they don't see the correlation.
I agree, both sides have legitimate concerns but you don't rob the people and then claim you are helping people.
Responsible people who pay for themselves realize that some day the bills will have to be paid.
The irresponsible people just keep drinking the Obama Kool-Aid.
Unfortunately our country have more irresponsible people than it does responsible people.
So the only way to have an agreement would be for our people to gain knowledge about budgets. It will happen some day; but will it be too late?
I think you can say there are also irresponsible people that want to slash funding to everything. It is like deciding you don't need to pay the water bill because it got to cost too much, so you cut it and then wonder why everyone says you smell like the dump. That is the tea party logic and fallacy, right there.
I think you can say there are also irresponsible people that want to slash funding to everything. It is like deciding you don't need to pay the water bill because it got to cost too much, so you cut it and then wonder why everyone says you smell like the dump. That is the tea party logic and fallacy, right there.
Y our statement presumes it is necessary for the government to spend all that it spends.
Which, is utterly false.
We would have MORE federal government than is needed, if it spent less than 25% of its current spending.
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.
That is the tea party logic and fallacy, right there.
