Liberals
 

I'm tired of hearing all this crap about how Kerry would be so much better as president than Bush. One thing that Kerry has promised to do, if elected, would be to roll back the tax cut that Bush gave us. I don't know about the rest of you, but I definitely don't want that to happen.

I'm reg'd as a Republican. Even though I don't make $200,000+ a year at the moment, I still don't think it is right for him to do that. If Kerry is elected that means he'll be in office for 4 years. Who knows, I might be making that amount of money a yr in the next 4 years. I was talking this over with my dad and found out that he got a tax break of $60,000 because of Bush. I admit, most Americans don't make $200,000+ a year. But let me ask some of you liberals out there, if you were making that much money and some politician wanted to tax you more because some lazy ass people wont get up and do something with their lives, why should we have to give more to the crackheads, prostitutes, welfare greedy people out there when bust our asses?

For all you liberals out there....think about this:

Since just about everyone on this site is/has been in college, lets say you are busting your ass making good grades....got a 3.0 GPA or better. Now lets say all your friends are out there partying their asses off, getting drunk all week long, dont show up to class half the time and never do their homework or study and they are just barely getting by with C and D grades. You, you're never going out...study every night, you even miss some football games inorder to stay ahead in the class and you basically give up any serious social life inorder to do good in college. Now, lets say some politician decides that they're going make sure all students have the same average GPA or better and for those of you who busted your ass, they're going going to take away points from your GPA and give them to those lazy students inorder for everyone to fair well. How would you feel? How would you like it if you were busting ass to get in med school but your GPA was knocked down because some football player had shitty grades or some frat boy got way too drunk his first semester and needed some of your grades so he could stay in school? Well, thats basically how John Kerry feels about the tax cut Bush gave. Seriously, think about it.

I don't know about some of you, but it is my view that the Government's purpose is to protect our people. They're supposed to make sure we have a good military, make sure we have roads, helps us when there are natural disasters, protect our rights and uphold the constitution.

Right now our country is serisously divided in half. John Kerry has made mention doing exactly the opposite of president Bush. He's the most liberal of all the Democrats. He's made mention of investing in science and making advances in technology. Well, do you really think we, as a world, need advances in technology? The last time a bunch of scientist got together and made a forever changing discovery was when we made the Atomic bomb. How many of you think the world is a safer place since nuclear weapons came in to play? There are limits as to how far things should be allowed to go. I'm not saying that we should not look in to finding cures for dieseases like Parkinsons's, Cancer, Alzheimers, etc etc etc. I'm all for it. All I'm saying is that there needs to be a limit set, a threshold that must not be crossed when it comes to science and technology.

Just my political 2 cents for the month.

Re: Liberals
 

So what you're saying here is that low income families don't deserve to have a decent education, good healthcare, a chance to get ahead?

And while welfare abuse exists, please don't assume that everyone that needs government assistance is lazy, a crackhead, or a prostitute.

Re: Liberals
 

Wow the first part of your post I thought you were decribing how bitter Bush's classmates must have felt to see him succeed after slacking-off while they busted their asses... :)

As for technology, I'm all for continued funding and advancement. While you decry the evil that the Atomic bomb brought, you leave out all of the positive spin-offs of the Atomic bomb... advances in power, medicine, computers, and telecommunitations. Take for example the method of commincation that you use daily... the internet decended from a military defense communication network designed to co-ordinate nuclear defense. I will never oppose the advance of science, because you can never predict the results of any advance, and the benifits it might bring.

Re: Re: Liberals
 

No one ever said getting ahead in life was easy nor does it happen over night. In most cases it takes generations. For example, my great grandfather was a farmer. This is my Dad's grandfather. He owned 400 acres in North Florida. Couldn't read very well, hadn't had more than a shitty highschool education and health care was almost non existant. He planted pine trees on 200 of the 400 acres...waited 15 years, sold the wood and the land as well as the remainder 200 acres. Sold everything. Everything he was/knew about was gone. He didnt have anything except a farm. They were poor in a sense. Then he sent my grandfather to college and then to law school. My grandfather got ahead by nothing but hard work. Didnt really have much growing up. One christmas, he told me, the family didnt have any money and when my grandfather told his dad he wanted something for christmas to play with...he cut a hole in the center of his pants and told him "there you go". My grandfather sent my father to college and then to law school and now my father had sent me to college. The thing is, it took my family generations to get where we are. People don't understand, getting ahead doesnt happen over night and you can't rely on the government to help you get there. In todays world everyone wants other people do more for them instead of helping theirselves. When you hear about working mothers or fathers who have to hold down 2 jobs just to survive and make ends meat.....I'm sorry, but thats just how it is. Hopefully their kids will grow up realizing how hard it was for their parents and hopefully make something of theirselves and then their children as well. My grandfather remembered when his dad had to go out and shoot a hog or deer for meat many times during the depression or else there would have been no meat to eat. This is why I look up to atheletes. Most atheletes are where they are because of hard work. Nothing but hard work. Most of them come from families that werent very well off. Do you realize how much discipline it takes to work out 5-7 days a week from the time you are 10 yrs old until the time your body gives out on you around 30+ years of age? Alot. Fact is....its not right to take away from families who work hard, put everything on the line and take huge risks to get ahead just so you can improve the lives of those who say they can't do it on their own.

Re: Re: Liberals
 

Yea, but do you or do you not agree that a standard should be set or a threshold drawn that must not be crossed? I mean, with advancement also come destruction. Einstein as well as Oppenheimer both thought the same....who are we to play god?

Re: Re: Liberals
 

A decent education is the responsibility of local communities. The US spends more money on education in absolute terms, per person, as a percentage of GDP, per person as a percentage of GDP, etc. then we ever have in our history. There is nothing that the federal government can do to improve education except to get out of the way of state and local governments.

Supporting increased federal involvement in education is paramount to supporting ineffective education for "low income families" and all others.

Tax cut that you got? Cashmoney, I hope you didn't spend it all in one place. :rolleyes:

The kneejerk reaction to defend Bush is something to behold. :rolleyes:

Many of the poor and deprived are simply living with the results of their own choices
 

Many of the poor and deprived are simply living with the results of their own choices.

If they choose to drop out of school, and choose to use drugs, and choose to become parents without marriage, they are likely to be poor and dependent on welfare - and many of the women have several children with assorted fathers, no marketable skills, and no prospects for imjprovement.

In spite of their situation, these people have a vote, and they have discovered that they can vote for a living.

They can vote for whomever promises the most welfare, the most weeks of unemployment funds, and the most benefits.

Most often, this vote goes for the democrats.

It's sickening.

i'm surprised this thread isn't already 200 pages ;)

Give it time, Mon... give it time! ;) :) :D

Re: Many of the poor and deprived are simply living with the results of their own cho
 

To a certain extent, I agree with you. Not all people receiving some form of government assistance (i.e. welfare, educational funding, farm subsidies) are receiving it because of their missteps in life. I am receiving federal money for college, and my only misstep was not being born to rich parents! :) In this day and age, there's no reason why a person can't finish high school (at the very least) and find some sort of job. It may not be fun, enlightening, or enriching, but bills don't pay themselves.
The culture of entitlement that has developed here over the past 30 or so years is pretty disgusting. If that mentality was present during the infancy of our nation, I shudder to think what we would be today.
I know a few people who are only voting for Bush because of his tax cut plan. They disagree w/ him on almost every other single point. That, IMO, is equally sickening.

Re: Re: Re: Liberals
 

Alright... how do we determine what is the limits are? How do we limit what avenues of research we can explore? I will never advocate a scientific threshold barrier... it smacks to much of Ludites or other fanatical opposition to science. Every country or culture has ethical or moral limitations to how research is conducted, but I tremble at the thought of any fanatical (religious, political, economic) group dictating what is "okay" science or technology.

Now as for the statement "who are we to play God?"... taken from a humanist standpoint, there is no God per se, but the inherent divinty of man acting under the imperitive to improve or grow. As for a religious perspective, God gave humanity free choice, for better or worse, but if we limit knowledge or research on religious grounds we are then holding ourselves to the standards of the so called "Dark Ages".

I was going to spend a lot of time on this but I felt myself becoming more and more drained by the level of blind ignorance my post was going to draw from both sides. Instead I'll say this, when people can stop being so damned selfish and looking out only for themselves, things will get better. There is a delicate balance that has been lost in this country between social responsibility and private gain. Unfortunately bipartisanship has all but vanished in it's true form. Just get that in your heads. Until people stop electing hardliners from either end, no matter who wins, America at large will lose.

And hoosier, your post is the perfect example of someone who doesn't know a thing except the same old escuses that have been told over and over again. It's one thing to be out of work because you're a drug addict or lazy, in which case i have no pity at all. It is something else to be plunged into inescapable poverty due to circumstances you could neither foresee nor prevent. More often than not, the latter is the reason people are homeless. But then I guess it's easier to say "most of them deserved it" and not feel guilt than to hear soemone's story and struggles and continue to not care.

Re: Liberals
 

The problem with this "logic" is that when comparing it to the real world and the point you are trying to make, you fail to take into account the difference in conditions that make poor areas poor and affluent areas rich.

I know of no liberals who are for the equality of success. There is a dire need however in terms of equality of opportunity. I know this because I can look at myself and realize that I've been given a lot of chances to succeed not because of the work I've done, but because I live in an upper middle class suburb. My HS friends parents are all lawyers, doctors, and engineers. I'd say probably a good 15% own their own successful small business, and I'm willing to bet that probably 75% of them have degrees beyond a Bachelors degree. I look at my HS and I realize that it's only been open for 10 years. I know that when I went there, each classroom had at least 1 computer and many had 3, 4, or 5. We had 3 very large computer labs. I had new textbooks in at least one class every year, and I got the chance to do all sorts of unique things. Compare this to an inner city school, or that of a small rural school district like so many of the people I've met in college and there is no comparison. They didn't have computers in every classroom, they had art and music programs cut, they had to learn using older textbooks that didn't have the most recent history or discoveries covered in them. And this is just in my experience. I look at my little brother, and he's going to a HS that opened just last August, and every student there got a free palm pilot, the 1/2 the classrooms have these white boards that are called "smart boards" that when you use special markers they will change and edit powerpoint presentations. When they read a novel in english, they don't receive the book in print, they get it beamed to their palms and they read it on that.

Knowing this, does it surprise me that I had no problem getting into college, and if I had wanted to go into debt that I could have gone practically anywhere? And all this is only a discussion of the physical, tangible assets my school had. Compare the fact that the average salary for a teacher in my former school district is in the top 5 in the state of Kansas, we also got the best teachers, the ones who had multiple job offers because of their skills.

All this adds up to show that I got opportunities that other kids didn't. I didn't have to work nearly as hard to get to college as many of the people I've met in college. Where the vast majority of the people I graduated with went to some sort of 4 year school, I talk to friends from rural nebraska where they were among only a handful of students that even left the town. They tell me stories about going home to find out that 4 more girls they graduated with are having their second kid.

I know for a fact that there many kids who worked 1000x harder than I did in HS to get good grades and do the right thing, but they didn't get the opportunity to go to college. They worked harder than I did, but simply because of where I grew up, I got the advantages, and people I grew up with who didn't work at all have gotten farther than some of those kids.

Everyone wants to think that the US is a meritocracy, where you are rewarded by the amount and quality of the work that you do, but until everyone can start out on a far more equal setting then that idealization will never, ever come true. It is that chance to become more equal, where the life that people live is truly determined by the choices they make, that Liberals are working for. Only then will youre little analogy be true to the real world in the United States.

Re: Re: Liberals
 

That's a very astute observation. I think the misconception that many people have about liberalism is that they're all about free handouts and making everyone the same in pseudo-Communist fashion. This is not the case. It's stupid to think that everyone can be successful and influential. On the other hand, it's wrong that people are denied opportunities because of their race, religion, or SES. What people choose to do with the opportunities given determines their success. I am all for offering equal opportunities for everyone. I am not for bailing people out because they blew it and chose to do drugs or commit crimes.

Saying that all liberals are for free handouts is like saying that all conservatives are against helping poor people.

Re: Re: Liberals
 

Good post...I agree 100%, but didn't have time to type it out.

Re: Re: Liberals
 

Thanks you for articulating exactly what I was thinking. :D

I come from a lower-middle class family and a rural school district. Not an inner city school district or the poorest school district, just and average one. And because my parents both have worked hard, they were able to help me pay for college. But since I also paid for college (and will be for a looong time with my loans) that meant I had jobs all through school. That meant I didn't get to take some sweet internships because they didn't pay or didn't pay enough for me to pay for school and eat. Opportunities are very drastically limited when you don't have a lot of money. I've earned my college degree, and I still struggle to pay all of my bills and loans every month.

Re: Re: Re: Liberals
 

I think that misconceptions about liberalism arise from people, in the US, who call themselves "liberal." Most are ignorant about what liberalism really is. Australians have a Liberal Party, and its for free (liberal) markets, and a minimal involvement in peoples lives. Its kind of like a moderate version our Libertarian Party, but with more foreign involvement. Europeans are also far more accurate with the label of "liberal."

Most people who I know IRL, and on this board, who call themselves "liberals" are social-democrats. They tend to have illiberal attitudes that become quite apparant when one is aware of the tenetts of classical liberalism. There's an old saying that "most macro-liberals are micro-fascists." This rings more true in the US where most self proclaimed liberals, really aren't.

One day I'll do some homework and find out exactly when, and why, the American definition of liberalism became so contorted. It seems to have occurred sometime in the first third of the 20th Century, and the change seems to have been driven by a Marxist reconstruction of linguistics to meet political agendas, the very act of which is profoundly illiberal.

So, I wouldn't call people's impressions of liberals, in this country, so off base. If most "liberals" actually knew what classical liberalism was, and honsetly labeled themselves, these misconceptions would go away.

Excellent post Russ! I did some Googling and found a really nice link that explains classical liberalism. Towards the end of the first section it explains/theorizes why the American definition of liberalism changed (it was around WWI). Interesting read, if you have a few minutes.

See this

One thing I have learned in my 23 years is that the more you earn, make, etc. the more is expected of you. Basically, you have more responsibility to others and to yourself. With this said and taxation being discussed (not grades, necessarily), if you make $200,000+, then you have worked hard to gain a certain place in life and you expect to be respected for your attainment, right? I would guess yes. Why can't someone expect something of you? People expect those of us who have college degrees to not act like dumb idiots. The minute you gain a respected position in life or $200,000+ does not mean social and personal responsibility flies out the window.

The more you gain, the more responsibility is given.

What's the point of arguing politcs?

Taxes are an unfortunate part of life. In New York, you work from January to the middle of May for the government. I remember when I figured out that I worked all day Monday and until about 2:30 Tuesday in order to pay my taxes. I was pretty shocked. :eek:

When I make enough money for this to be worth it, most of my income will be moved offshore.

-Rudey

You state that as if it's just the way things are. That may be the way that you perceive them to be, but it's definitely not a unanimous perception.

For someone to "expect" me to give them money because I make a lot isn't really fair to me. It's certainly not just. If some of my friends who decided they'd rather have kids in HS than diplomas expect me to pay their food, rent, etc., and I say no, does that make me a "dumb idiot"?

Social and personal repsonsibility should rest with the each individual. It should be primarily to themselves. That's where our philosophies primarily differ.

You got it all wrong...its not the more you gain, it's the more power you have the greater the responsibilty becomes. Just because you make 200,000+ a year doesnt mean you have the power. I can be a millionaire and have less power that a $25,000 a yr state represenitive has. And just because you have a college degree doesnt mean people expect you to not act like an idiot. Every year when Florida plays Florida State in the state rivalry football game, I expect there to be massive amount of idiotic FSU fans running their mouths all the time.

But you'll still be taxed unless you do it under the table and in that case the IRS will catch up with you eventually.

Not really. Your income outside of this country is taxed differently, hence the rapid rise of accounts in the caymans.

And even if I just didn't declare it, that's nothing new. Immigrants are largely into cash businesses that are undeclared - hence why they often refuse to accept credit cards. The government wouldn't even know where to start.

-Rudey

My parents thought about doing this but decided against it. My dad's mom worked for the IRS. You wouldn't believe how much they know about you're finances and where they go and what you declared or didnt. There's always a paper trail.



But yea, if I had enough money...I'd pack up and leave and then open accounts in Zuerich.

Okay, I really don't want to go into this too intensely but I think when you say "I don't want people mooching off of my riches" you sound like a sheltered rich kid who has no idea what it's like for the millions who live paycheck to paycheck. Just because you (and I) were born into relative affluence doesn't give us the right to judge those who didn't. I indirectly work for the department of human services. Do you know how little you have to make to get food stamps, how little that helps and how many restrictions there are on them? It's not a handout, it's basic subsistance.

This isn't about giving stuff to people who screwed up their lives, it's about not letting people starve and die of perfectly cureable diseases in the midst of the richest nation in the world.

Please don't flame me, I won't fight back. I just needed to say this.

It depends on where you are.

There are plenty of folks on the welfare roles in my state who are doing fine financially. They get most of their income as unreported cash and then turn around and collect benefits. They'll never be caught because the caseworkers in my state are overloaded and undereducated (you only need a bachelor's in anything to be a social worker).

If someone screws up their own lives, they should be given more incentive to make things work. Not incentive to have a basic subsistance provided for them without them having to do anything. As for dying of certain diseases, I'd say it completely depends on what the disease is. Sometimes, I feel that people should have to suffer the consequences of their own stupidity -- it's called natural selection.

Well, then it's a good thing that stickus assus disease isn't fatal!

Seriously, are you saying that if someone gets, say, pneumonia and doesn't have health insurance because she's unemployed, she should just sit quietly at home and die because that's what she deserves for being unemployed?

What if she chose to be unemployed?

What if she chose to not pursue options available to her?

What if even though she didn't have insurance she chose to not leave and go to a hospital?

Nobody said someone should die, but there are choices I don't want to have to pay for. Here's a better one. A woman chooses to smoke/do drugs/have rampant sex...whatever...and gets sick and puts it on the tax payers. I have to pay for this jizzbag?

-Rudey

Why is she unemployed?

How did she get sick?

Why is there no one that wants to help take care of her?

Sounds like she probably lacks personal responsibility and should be accountable for her decisions.

ktsnake,

I am not saying start handing out cash just like it's nothing. Taxes are a necessity for educational purposes (ex. teachers, school equipment, etc), city utilities (ex. trash pickup), etc. It's not just for welfare recipients. If that's all taxes went to, then, yes I'd have a problem too. Taxes fund a lot of the things you expect out of the government. If you want to start taking your own trash to the land fill, then, by all means, do so. If you don't have governmental trash pickup, you usually pay a private company to come pick up your trash. Start sending your kids to private school and see how expensive that is. Stop attending museums financially supported by tax payers. Stop driving on roads maintained by state, city, and county . . . see how far that gets you. Now, you better stop going to the library as well. Your kids won't be able to do the research paper because mom and dad don't like paying for the library through taxation. OH! and don't go to a state supported college because, again, taxes go towards that too. Go to a private school (Furman University in Greenville, SC is between $25,000 and $30,000 a year . . . compare that to your state colleges/universities).

I am just saying the better off you are, the more is expected of you. Yes, that does mean higher taxes so the burden won't be left up to those who can afford it the least. Higher taxes on the poor and middle class won't offer an incentive to make more. It will eventually cut out the middle class (which is the largest class in America . . . if we cut them out, this country would be overwhelmed by more welfare recipients). The poor will just get farther in the hole. The rich will keep exploiting others to get richer.

Furthermore, I never called you a dumb idiot. I was just making a comparison. I simply stated that college graduates are expected to be smart individuals and not act like dumb idiots over anything. Yes, we may slip up but that's human nature.

Also, I want to ask you a question. I am not trying to offend anyone or flame anyone by this question. If you make a lot of money, does that give you the right to slack off just because you feel like it and you earned a high position/a lot of money on the totem pole? Should you just leave someone hungry or die of a disease because they didn't work as hard as you?

It should be my personal choice. If I want to give to a charity for poor folks, then that should be my own choice. The system as it is = nothing more than redistribution of the wealth. Classic socialist ideology is becoming very pervasive in our society.

I didn't say that ALL taxes were bad. I'm willing to pay taxes where I can derive some sort of benefit. You are saying that I'm arguing against things that I never mentioned. Yes, the government can do certain things that we as individuals cannot do for ourselves. I know about Furman actually, my youngest brother's fiancee was a Chi-O there :D.

To sum up my position: I'm not against necessary government services. What I am against is redistribution of the wealth and rewarding laziness and irresponsibility.

Not very Christian of you ;) However classifying all people that are in finacial straits as lazy or irresponsible is also is very Christian either. Of couse coming from a "socialist" or "communist" society (as some US conservatives have labeled us) I guess I'm biased myself.

I have always ascribed to the belief that the role of government was to advance the betterment of society, while protecting the weak.

How about instead of finding the verse in the Bible:

"Ask and you shall receive.", try looking up "Seek and you shall find."

The Bible has quite a bit to say about personal responisbility and accepting the consequences of your sins against God and against other men. As always with Christianity and the Bible, it's all about how you interpret it and what parts you decide to read and remember.

Exactly it's all in how you interpret it :)

For example I could read "Ask and you shall recieve" or "Seek and you shall find" as both imperatives for society or the government to provide aid... as in asking for aid and recieving it, or seek aid and recieving it.

I agree. :)

I don't.;)