Convince me to vote for Kerry

[Ned]

ML, we all know where Kerry and his fellow liberals come from. They believe "A" primary purpose of government is to foster social equality. Thus they are always taking about class warfare, the rich, etc., etc., etc. There is nothing "liberal" about these folks. Nothing at all. They are socialists.

[Drachasor]

Originally posted by MalevolentLight
Before I even go into how ridiculous that idea is, let me first ask how many god damn times have we heard this from a Democrat? If time they run for election it's always about how the rich make too much money and they are stepping all over the poor so we're going to tax the **** out of the rich and bring them down. Well who are the so called "rich"? The real population of the "rich" is made up of small business owners who make over 200K a year, but aren't making millions. They are greatly affected by tax increases and you can bet if you hit their pockets they are going to make cuts. I know this for a fact because my father is a small business owner. He's struggling to make ends meet right now while he pays off debt and if kerry gets elected he is ****ed. And all those people that work for him are ****ed too because they're out of a job. Your idea of "boosting" the working class has never worked and never will work. We heard the same god damn things from Clinton and it didn't work. Again, it's just the same tired lines over and over and over again. All the Democrats do is set one side against another. You talk about how the white man is pushing down the black man. You talk about how the rich are stepping all over the poor. Get a new line for once and actually back up your "policies" and "plans" with some real statistical numbers because it is obvious a tax increase on only the rich isn't going to pay for everything Kerry has proposed.

Your dad would save money by having to spend less on health care for his employees. There are many other benefits to small businesses in particular that Kerry is proposing. He plans on increasing financing and venture capital into small businesses. He plans on increases government contracting to aid them. He plans on simplifying the taxes for small businesses so they are not drowning in forms. He plans on giving tax credit on utility costs for small businesses. He also wants them to have a more of a voice with the WTO.

Bush is proposing some of this, but not nearly as much.

Kerry is well aware of the very small businesses making less than 500k a year need some help, but larger businesses can afford to not make as much money for a few months as the economy recovers. They have money saved up for such occasions.

-Drachasor

[Drachasor]

Originally posted by Ned


They were "stupid" only if you believe in socialism.

Or if you believe the current Nobel Price Winner in Economics. Or if you understand that trickle-down economics doesn't always work; especialyl if companies hardly hire any more people despite recovery. Putting money into the hands of the people helps a lot more.

-Drachasor

[Drachasor]

Originally posted by Ned
Bull. There is evidence that people high in the French government and close to Chirac were involved. This does not per se mean that Chirac is involved, but it does raise a lot of questions does it not?

Your lack of incredulity is incredulous.

I said there is no evidence that Chirac was involved, and right now the evidence against others hasn't been fully tested and gone over.

Do you not believe in the principle of innocent until proven guilty? No one has been proven guilty yet, least of all Chirac, and even more least of all the people of those democratic countries. You see corruption in a few and you then claim that the entire country is untrustworthy and terrible; that is at the very least, highly innaccurate.

-Drachasor

[MalevolentLight]

Your dad would save money by having to spend less on health care for his employees. There are many other benefits to small businesses in particular that Kerry is proposing. He plans on increasing financing and venture capital into small businesses. He plans on increases government contracting to aid them. He plans on simplifying the taxes for small businesses so they are not drowning in forms. He plans on giving tax credit on utility costs for small businesses. He also wants them to have a more of a voice with the WTO.

Bush is proposing some of this, but not nearly as much.

Kerry is well aware of the very small businesses making less than 500k a year need some help, but larger businesses can afford to not make as much money for a few months as the economy recovers. They have money saved up for such occasions.

-Drachasor

Thankyou for proving my point perfectly Drachasor. Kerry is there to increase the role of government in people's businesses which will in turn only lead to higher taxation. All you talk about is what he plans to do and I see no statistical evidence or even remotely a way to do all these promised things. And what do you mean as the economy recovers? Again, you ignore everything statistical and everything that points to how well the economy is going. It's a god damn joke and you aren't convincing anyone. Every small business owner I have ever met is terrified of Kerry and they aren't buying any of it. Every doctor every medical worker doesn't buy kerry's bull**** either. The only people you are convincing are yourselves and the uneducated voters like Dissident.

They have money saved up for such occasions.

I'm sorry I didn't know they saved up for the chance that a Democrat would be elected that would **** them over.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Ned


This is perverse.

Yup, i suppose. I mean i wouldnt blame anyone who decided NOT to take that argument into account when voting. For those of us who are genuinely on the fence, its at least something to think about.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Ned


You seem to differ from the traditional socialist position only on details of policy implemetation.

What is your position on the following statement:

A primary purpose of government is to foster "social equality."

I would not agree with that... government should foster equal opprotunity... not social equality... social equality isn't possible.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


Or poor or a woman or gay or an intellectual or basically anything else that went against the mainstream. The 50s, a culturally dead, soul sucking vampire decade. The reason the 60s were so over the top was because of the 50s.

I would take issue with "intellectual"
There was plenty of cultural productivity in the US in the 50's, including novels, modern art, architecture, etc. For the time being i wont discuss the other issues, as each deserves a discussion of its own.

[Drachasor]

Originally posted by MalevolentLight
Thankyou for proving my point perfectly Drachasor. Kerry is there to increase the role of government in people's businesses which will in turn only lead to higher taxation. All you talk about is what he plans to do and I see no statistical evidence or even remotely a way to do all these promised things. And what do you mean as the economy recovers? Again, you ignore everything statistical and everything that points to how well the economy is going. It's a god damn joke and you aren't convincing anyone. Every small business owner I have ever met is terrified of Kerry and they aren't buying any of it. Every doctor every medical worker doesn't buy kerry's bull**** either. The only people you are convincing are yourselves and the uneducated voters like Dissident.

I guess you don't talk to many doctors. My dad does and he IS a doctor and he knows that Kerry is the better choice in a variety of ways.

I also find it ironic that you think giving tax credits to small businesses, helping them have a role in the WTO, making healthcare more affordable, helping them get government contracts and financing, which are all ways to help small businesses stay aloft and grow are suddenly "evil" interloping by the government.

Oh, and if you look at the latest figures you'll find that job growth is slowing down. This is especially bad because of all of the lost jobs and the fact that not only are there fewer jobs, but there aren't jobs for all the new people that regular job growth provides. 9 million immigrants and population growth are nothing to sneeze at. The job situation is quite serious.

Originally posted by MalevolentLight
I'm sorry I didn't know they saved up for the chance that a Democrat would be elected that would **** them over.

Evidently you don't understand that companies do save money for a rainy day. The Working class (which I can only presume you are part of now) *do* tend not to do this, and that is why giving them essential tax breaks

-Drachasor

[Drachasor]

Oh, and Bush is a divider not a uniter:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/content/?ci=13735

-Drachasor

[lord of the mark]

some '50s lit.

The concern with conformity is reflected in David Riesman's The Lonely Crowd, John Kenneth Galbraith -The Affluent Society, William H. Whyte's The Organization Man , Ayn Rand - Atlas Shrugged , and Sloan Wilson's The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit. A new group of authors appeared on the scene in the form of the Beats, or the beat generation or some called them beatniks. Best known of these are Jack Kerouac - Kerouac's works - On the Road, Dharma Bums, The Town and The City, Mexico City Blues (poetry), Lawrence Ferlinghetti A Coney Island of the Mind , Pictures of a Gone World, and Allen Ginsberg Howl(Poetry). Gregory Corso , Neal Cassady , Michael McClure , Gary Snyder, William S. Burroughs were other beat authors giving voice to the anti-establishment movement.

Science Fiction became more popular with the actual possibility of space travel, Ray Bradbury wrote The Martian Chronicles. Isaac Asimov wrote I, Robot, and other books about worlds to be discovered. Established authors continuing to write included Tennessee Williams -The Roman Spring of Mrs. Stone; Robert Penn Warren -World Enough and Time; Carl Sandberg -Complete Poems; Herman Wouk -The Caine Mutiny; J. D. Salinger-The Catcher in the Rye; Truman Capote -The Grass Harp; John Steinbeck- East of Eden; Edna Ferber -Giant; James Michener -The Bridges of Toko Ri, Hawaii; Thomas Costain-The Silver Chalice; Eudora Welty -The Ponder Heart; William Faulkner -The Town.

oh, and in 1951 Hannah Arendt published The Origins of Totalitarianism.


And Ralph Ellison published Invisible Man in 1952.

James Baldwins first two novels, including Go Tell it on the Mountain

Player Piano by Kurt Vonnegut

The Power Elite by C. Wright Mills

[MalevolentLight]

I guess you don't talk to many doctors. My dad does and he IS a doctor and he knows that Kerry is the better choice in a variety of ways.

I also find it ironic that you think giving tax credits to small businesses, helping them have a role in the WTO, making healthcare more affordable, helping them get government contracts and financing, which are all ways to help small businesses stay aloft and grow are suddenly "evil" interloping by the government.

Oh, and if you look at the latest figures you'll find that job growth is slowing down. This is especially bad because of all of the lost jobs and the fact that not only are there fewer jobs, but there aren't jobs for all the new people that regular job growth provides. 9 million immigrants and population growth are nothing to sneeze at. The job situation is quite serious.

Then your father is in the minority. Maybe you should look up some of the groups against Edwards then come back and talk to me. I don't know of any doctors that are for a government run healthcare system. Maybe you should read up sometime on the idea of the invisible hand in economics. Taxes shouldn't be so high that tax credits are even needed. If you have to start giving out tax credits in order for a small business to make it then something is wrong. And again, I see alot of promises but I don't see any ways on how any of this is going to work. Government getting involved in the private sector is never a good thing. All of you can point to the great depression, but that was a different era and those social programs (including social security) were never meant to be continued after we came out of it. Who is the government to plan the retirement of people and to take their money and give it to someone else? And I have looked at the latest figures and they are very good. Unemployment is at a lower level than when Clinton ran for re-election in 96. You keep harping on unemployment, but that only works on voters when they actually know someone who isn't employed (yet another issue used every single election by Democrats). What's next on the list, out-sourcing? Maybe we can get started on the Heinz corporation then. Or how about while we're on the subject of taxes we ask why Teresa Heinz Kerry is only paying 1.2% in income tax. Hypocracy is a religion for Democrats.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Sava
I would not agree with that... government should foster equal opprotunity... not social equality... social equality isn't possible.

Welcome to the Republican Party, Sava.

[Japher]

Welcome to the Republican Party, Sava.

hehehehehehehehehehe

[Ned]

Originally posted by Drachasor


I said there is no evidence that Chirac was involved, and right now the evidence against others hasn't been fully tested and gone over.

Do you not believe in the principle of innocent until proven guilty? No one has been proven guilty yet, least of all Chirac, and even more least of all the people of those democratic countries. You see corruption in a few and you then claim that the entire country is untrustworthy and terrible; that is at the very least, highly innaccurate.

-Drachasor

If you would simply admit to the possibility of corruption by Chirac, I would be satisfied.