Republicans are too Liberal!!!

[Japher]

I'm made at my political party right now. They have given in to the enemy, and I don't know why. Does anyone?

The tax legislation that is going on right now is fine, IMO. Yet, coupled with the increase in government spending on social programs and tax credits being given to people who don't even pay taxes is just going to ruin the system... By giving the Dems a bone all we are going to end up doing is widening the gap between the rich and the poor. We are hindering the poor by giving them more money and more care (something which is a Liberal conspiracy) and helping the rich to get richer.

We are playing Robin Hood to both sides of the coin! And, in a fashion, making ourselves out to be Prince John.

All I have to say is that to many Dems gots thier hands in the Republican pot, and they're going to ruin us... Two party systems suk!

[SlowwHand]

A 2 party system is mandatory.

[Caligastia]

I agree Japher. I think the Libertarians are far more fiscally conservative than the Republicans. The Republicans have sold out.

[Az]

Stop giving Americans such a bad rep, Sloww.

[Carver]

Your post wasn't very specific (more of a rant) but Republican Senators have forced the White House to accept smaller tax cuts because the country cannot afford the cuts Bush wants.

The social programs and tax credits for low income earners are almost completely insignificant to the budget. Social Security and Medicare for retired persons, along with defense, are the major expenditures the US has.

So you can kill the uninformed, factually incorrect crap about poor people busting the budget. It is the tax cuts for the wealthy that have erased the surpluses and given us the biggest deficit in history.

[Japher]

A 2 party system is mandatory.

They just seem to be the same these days, or they are in process of flipping poles, like a magnet.

My views on the economy, social reform, foreign poilcy, etc. have not changed yet I feel that thier's may have. Where can a right-winged conservative go these days?!

[chequita guevara]

Are you a fascist?

[Japher]

Your post wasn't very specific (more of a rant)

That is why I used the 'rant' emoticon

So you can kill the uninformed, factually incorrect crap about poor people busting the budget.

I don't believe I said the poor were killing the budget, if you want me to I will. I was saying that we increasing the gap between economic classes by imposing these mandates. Something which, IMO, will only lead to more harm than good.

[SlowwHand]

Definitely not the same.

Couple of things.
I don't agree with Liberatarians being more fiscally conservative, and
Azazel, WTF are you talking about?
Not that I should change my giving a bad rep; I'm just curious as to how I was able to accomplish it this time.

[Boris Godunov]

The Republicans have been giving money away to people who don't pay taxes for years--they're called huge corporations. See how much of a tax refund Enron got, and then see how much tax they actually paid.

By subsidizing these huge corporations that are mismanaged into the ground, the Republicans have ensured continuing fiscal scandals while culprits like Ken Lay get away with millions and the workers lose their retirements and get shafted.

Until you explain the ludicrous notion that offering social welfare programs somehow keeps the poor poor while making the rich richer, I will reject it as the steaming pile of rancid dung that it is.

[Defiant]

GEEEE Boris,
I work for a 30 million dollar/year company and we pay a hell of alot in taxes and we little return from the gov't.
I sure as hell haven't been given my company car yet.

BTW, right here in this plant we have workers that can only work so many hours or it disrupts their gov't check, what was that you were talking about how, social welfare doesn't help to keep the poor poor?

[Japher]

Until you explain the ludicrous notion that offering social welfare programs somehow keeps the poor poor while making the rich richer, I will reject it as the steaming pile of rancid dung that it is.

Nice flame A lot better than my Troll.

However I don't feel that the notion is ludicrous. While I feel that your assessment of Enron is correct I also see that by "subsidizing" the people, who are also "mismanaged", that Liberals have "ensured" stagnant poverty levels, as well as their vote. More so by increasing such funding they are only adding salt to the wound and not only prolonging the injustice, but wrosening it. Much in the same way that Enron colapsed, what would of happened if the government increased their subsidies to Enron?

By giving money to such programs that give handouts to poor people we are only giving poor people more to be poor with. Instead of fixing the problem we are only avoiding it. The problem is not that their is not enough money, the problem is that there are too many of the wrong types of programs or programs that mismanaged or, even worse, abused by second and third generation welfare recipents and illegal aliens, who can some reason, vote!

If your going to tell me that mismanagement of government funds is isolated to corporations, then I see your pile of rancid dung.

[Boris Godunov]

Your premise falls apart with a quick look at history.

Compare the standard of living of the poor in industrialized nations before social welfare programs were enacted. Compare them after.

You'll notice in that comparison that the standard of living for the poor improved quite dramatically.

Now, are welfare programs perfect? No. Are they mismanaged and waste money? Frequently, yes. I am all for cleaning up such programs to make them more efficient and fair.

However, having worked for SS, I can tell you that the horror stories of abuse are the rare instances, and the vast majority of welfare and disability cases are valid ones wherein a real need was addressed. We had the Great Depression to learn that the problems created by a lack of a social safety net are far less palatable than the problems it creates.

Ideally, we would have a world wherein welfare was unneccessary. But that is not the case, nor will it be any time soon. Democrats, albeit imperfectly, are at least on the right side by wanting to make sure everyone in the country has food on their plates and can be taken care of in times of great need. I have not seen the Republicans offering a solution other than the nebulous claim that market forces will provide for all, which is bull hockey.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Caligastia
I agree Japher. I think the Libertarians are far more fiscally conservative than the Republicans. The Republicans have sold out.

Only to considerations of common sense. Anyone who believes in Libertarianism as a political system is nuts.

[Nubclear]

You complain about Republicans being too liberal? I complain about democrats being to conservative At least you have a party. Our party is falling apart at the seams.

And anyway.....Can anyone guess which country has the highest standards of living in the world?

Norway.