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.
OK smart folks, tell me your solution, and I will tell you mine. Mines extreme and socialist. Yours I imagine is extreme and conservative. I will additionally explain why I think mine is more likely to occur or not occur after seeing yours.
OK smart folks, tell me your solution, and I will tell you mine. Mines extreme and socialist. Yours I imagine is extreme and conservative. I will additionally explain why I think mine is more likely to occur or not occur after seeing yours.
Yours has been tried, to the cost of $15,000,000,000,000...It has failed, and not matter how much name calling to and people like you do it does not altar this fact.
And keep in mind that that our 15% are just on the border for the most part whereas in 1960 it was a lot more near to the bottom end I suspect.
But hey lets ignore that, its far more important that people making 10 million or more a year have enough for a spare yacht or two.
Wow, what an intellectually dishonest argument.
By YOUR definition, and by the definition of YOUR party's leaders, everyone making less than 4 TIMES the poverty level is dependent on government for basics.
Which means that you have simply adjusted the definition of poverty so you can play semantics.
OK smart folks, tell me your solution, and I will tell you mine. Mines extreme and socialist. Yours I imagine is extreme and conservative. I will additionally explain why I think mine is more likely to occur or not occur after seeing yours.
Unlike liberals I recognize there are problems with no solutions. The poor will always be with us. Let us not subsidize bad behavior in some futile attempt to eliminate poverty.
From "The Vision of the Anointed" Thomas Sowell
“In the tragic vision, individual sufferings and social evils are inherent in the innate deficiencies of all human beings, whether these deficiencies are in knowledge, wisdom, morality, or courage. Moreover, the available resources are always inadequate to fulfill all the desires of all the people. Thus there are no “solutions” in the tragic vision, but only trade-offs that still leave many unfulfilled and much unhappiness in the world.” — P. 113
OK smart folks, tell me your solution, and I will tell you mine. Mines extreme and socialist. Yours I imagine is extreme and conservative. I will additionally explain why I think mine is more likely to occur or not occur after seeing yours.
So what makes you think you deserve to take money from people who work to make that money? If you don't like a capitalistic country why are you staying here?
Yes taxes have been raised but Obama ran around the country saying tax the rich. He called the rich a single making $200k and a married couple making $250k and you say they have yachts.
Now the middle class are going to pay higher taxes too.
Unlike liberals I recognize there are problems with no solutions. The poor will always be with us. Let us not subsidize bad behavior in some futile attempt to eliminate poverty.
From "The Vision of the Anointed" Thomas Sowell
“In the tragic vision, individual sufferings and social evils are inherent in the innate deficiencies of all human beings, whether these deficiencies are in knowledge, wisdom, morality, or courage. Moreover, the available resources are always inadequate to fulfill all the desires of all the people. Thus there are no “solutions” in the tragic vision, but only trade-offs that still leave many unfulfilled and much unhappiness in the world.” — P. 113
The tax payer has been bilked out of billions to fight the war on poverty. And what did they get for the investment in the poor? Illegitimate kids, another generation of poverty, demands for more money. In other words it was a very poor return.
By YOUR definition, and by the definition of YOUR party's leaders, everyone making less than 4 TIMES the poverty level is dependent on government for basics.
Which means that you have simply adjusted the definition of poverty so you can play semantics.
You are also leaving out the millions of illegals living here.
Notice how leftist are steering clear of this thread...
Actually its another stupid thread. We could argure that after spending one trillion dollars on vets in the past 15 years they are no better off. We spent 20 trillion on Medicare and seniors and they are still dying just like they were in 1966. Or we spent 40 trillion on SS and seniors are still in poverty. Or how about the Tea Partys favorite gubbermint giveaway Medicare Part D. We spent 500 billion on that and seniors are still dying.
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.
