Thanks for this, Patrick. I wonder exactly how free your purchase is?
In other news, I plan to go to my polling place today and vote Obama. I encourage other registered US voters to do the same, if you haven't already.
"Clientes"
8 years ago
18 comments:
Good luck in the polling lines. I'm very happy to have voted two weeks ago. I love early voting. :)
I'm voting for "Obama".
LOL, sorry, couldn't resist.
Yes we can!
there was no line in my precinct. I'm a Georgia voter!
It'd be nice if only people who vote for Obama would have to live under his tax structure.
Oh... but wait... it wouldn't work then, because it requires a redistribution of wealth, which is not only theft in the present sense, but a disincentive to work in a future sense. Good job. It'll be a wonderful America when the government steals successful peoples money, and lazy people don't have to work.
Well... oh well. I guess John Locke was wrong about the purpose of a civil society.
Hey, if you can say something as blatant as "I'm voting for Obama, and you should do", your own Democrat fairness propositions says I should be allowed to give the opposite opinion. I guess... unless I was wrong about calling you a socialist... and should have said communist.
You are allowed to give your opinion, and I'm allowed to tell you you are totally wrong.
I don't have a problem with socialism - did you know that in socialist europe everybody can get preventative healthcare without paying an arm and a leg? And new parents get leave, no questions asked?
You also display the same fallacy as my students did last week in their policy speeches. You assume that people who make less than $200,000 a year don't work as hard as the people who make more, and that more work = more money. Let me tell you, as someone involved in the educational system: it doesn't. You also assume that the Obama tax plan would make everyone have equal income, or give the additional income from taxing the rich directly to the poor which is untrue. In fact, most of our tax money right now goes to the Iraq war. It would be nice if everyone who complains about paying their fair share in taxes could live without the security and services those taxes pay for.
This is the last place I expected to see this debate.
Socialist Europe? Is that who we want to be like? Is it even possible for us to emulate that? Will they exist in 50 years unchanged?
The U.S. stopped looking to other countries as an example sometime around 1776.
It seems like for socialism to work there would have to be a common agreement that the society is more important than the individual. If that is to be the assumption in our society we'd better rewrite all of our textbooks, T.V. shows, movies, etc.
We would also have to assume that the government knows better than the people how to spend their money.
Seems like the Democrats (and the Republicans for the past 10 or 50 years) need to use quotes every time they use the word "democracy".
It'd be nice if only people who vote for Obama would have to live under his tax structure.
Like Warren Buffett? Or all the people making under $200,000 who will receive a tax cut?
Oh... but wait... it wouldn't work then, because it requires a redistribution of wealth, which is not only theft in the present sense, but a disincentive to work in a future sense. Good job. It'll be a wonderful America when the government steals successful peoples money, and lazy people don't have to work.
I'd like to see you hold up for a week doing what many in the working class making under $200,000 a year do 52 weeks a year. If you honestly think that anyone who isn't financially rewarded by the current system is "lazy," then you're quite frankly delusional. It would be better for your reputation as a human being if you educated yourself instead of proclaiming your ignorance for the world to see.
Well... oh well. I guess John Locke was wrong about the purpose of a civil society.
You know, John Locke isn't the only political scientist out there... and many of us, in fact, do think he was wrong.
Hey, if you can say something as blatant as "I'm voting for Obama, and you should do", your own Democrat fairness propositions says I should be allowed to give the opposite opinion. I guess... unless I was wrong about calling you a socialist... and should have said communist.
That you would call a vote for Obama "communist" demonstrates just how ignorant you are.
Oh, and I don't know how they do things at the Rush Limbaugh Skool of Speling, but here in reality, the proper adjectival form of "Democrat" is "Democratic." Please adjust your writing and speaking habits accordingly.
America is going to be a very very sad place to live. But apparently that's what people want. They'll learn the hard way, but by then it will be too late.
I don't know about you, Skeeter, but I've been learning the hard way for the last 8 years.
Geez, any tax policy is redistributive, so I find that an absurd argument. Just see how long this country would survive with no taxes and no government services paid for by those taxes. Show me just how we could have a system where people paid exactly the amount of tax to pay for the services they use. It is impossible. No one is advocating a return to the days of super high marginal tax rates for the top earners.
I do not understand why high wage earners spend so much time demonizing those on the lower end of the scale. We need people to do all kinds of different jobs to have a functioning society. We should be grateful there are people willing to clean toilets and flip burgers for us.
I think Obama is a very qualified person, and I was happy to cast my vote for him on Sunday. This was NOT an anybody but Bush type of vote for me this time.
LOL
Bethany, I'll give you this... at least you admit you're a socialist. I have FAR less of a problem with that than I do with people who're in favor of socialist legislation, yet pretend they're not.
So you believe in a system of governance which has never worked in the history of human kind... at least you're honest about it. Thats better then president elect Obama.
Wow, I can't believe this discussion in this place. But I am pleased that everyone has been civil.
I am not wealthy, making far, far less than $200,000 years, but I am gonna have to throw in with hossrex and justbennett.
There is a fundamental truth in life that cannot be legislated away: Life is not fair. I learned this when I was a kid, and I was raised to believe in personal responsibility.
Unlike you, Bethany, who admit your socialistic tendencies, far too many of the happy socialists out there don't even recognize that they are socialists, or even what socialism is. I find this extremely disturbing.
Socialism is a wonderful theory. The problem is that is doesn't translate well into practice.
That socialized medicine everyone talks about, well...consider my Norwegian friend whose daughter had a severe ear infection. It's true she could go to the doctor for free, but the soonest appointment was six weeks away. And, they are not allowed to see the doctor of their choice. That choice is made by someone else for them.
And just take a look at Medicaid. Socialized medicine at its finest. Anyone happy with the way that runs?
After working 13+ hours at the poll yesterday, dealing with masses of ignorant people, some of them in their 40's and older, proudly proclaiming, "This is my first time to vote," and who in some cases could not even read the ballot or sign their names, I am just weary.
I disagree with you guys about what counts as socialism in practice. Hossrex, you seem to be only counting communism as socialism. Last I checked we just socialized a bunch of banks.
Mary, you must have great insurance, because I don't get to pick my doctor - my insurance company chooses for me. Frankly, I prefer government bureaucrats to capitalist ones who DEFINTELY are trying to get my money.
Bethany, yes, we did socialize a bunch of banks.
I don't have great medical insurance. I mostly pay my own way, at great personal financial sacrifice, but as I said in my earlier post, I was taught personal responsibility. I was taught that life is not fair, and there is no free lunch. Somebody, somewhere pays.
The thing that disturbs me, among others, is that for those that want to live as socialists, there are many, many countries out there where they could move and live to their socialistic little heart's content. But there was only one America.
And why is it, while I'm on that track, that people the world over want nothing like they want to come to America? You don't see Americans, or anyone else beating a path to any other country's door.
I just thought of something else. Last year my son had the pleasure of meeting some Frenchmen who were over here for a re-enacting event. They were professional, educated, men in their 30's, and they had a lot of thoughtful, intelligent conversation about politics and history and current events. My son asked them what they, as Frenchmen, thought about America. Their answer: "In our hearts we are all Americans."
whoa, whoa. I didn't say I didn't like America. And I didn't say that I thought we should socialize everything and pay everybody the same or anything like that. I'm just saying that "socialist" isn't an inherent evil. Isn't what makes America great it's ability to change when there is trouble? Most people believe FDR's New Deal was incredibly socialist, and without it we wouldn't be the America we are today.
Implying that people who disagree with some of america's policies are unamerican or looking for a free lunch is disturbing to me. I'm interested in ways to make things better for more people - please don't cast me as some empty-headed idealist who doesn't understand hard work and that life isn't fair.
Bethany is wise beyond her years. Not because she agrees with me, but because of the ability she has to backup her opinions with reason and fact.
I'm glad that everyone remained civil (doesn't usually happen on the "Internet").
I'm a republican, who voted for Obama. The republican party no longer shares my values. The government is larger than even after four years of Bush. The national debt has gone from 4 trillion to 10 trillion in 8 years.
I am pro-life, I believe that life begins at conception and should have right from conception. However, I supported Obama, who has a contrary political stance. Why? Because I also value life that is already born. For example, the 10's of thousands of innocent Iraqi's that have did in a purposeless, unjustified war that has had little benefit and so much cost, including cost that goes beyond money. Also, we've lost thousands of American troops in a war that has no justification. So many right-wingers say it is "unamerican" to say a soldier died in a war without a purpose. I say it's the truth; thousands of American soldiers died in a war that we shouldn't have fought. Our soldiers performed with great honor and love for our country, but why send them to die when they didn't have to? I say let's do the patriotic thing and look at our past, learn from it, and come out of it a better country.
Bethany made a great point that we just socialized our failing banks at the cost of everyone. George W. Bush championed this plan, and John McCain "suspended" his campaign to cheerleader it through. So does that make them socialists as well?
We needed to get away from McCain, Bush, and Palin because we can't afford more trigger happy, unilateral-diplomacy politicians in the White House.
Regardless, the election is over and the American people have voted in favor of regime change. We need to do a new "new deal" that builds our country's renewable energy infrastructure and helps make us energy independent.
If we want to fight terrorist, the best way to do it is to stop billions of American dollars following into the terrorists hands in exchange for oil.
That (and more) is why this republican voted for Obama.
Sorry, Bethany, my rant wasn't particularly directed at you.
My objection to socialism is this:
The govt has no $ of its own, so when it steps in to "help" it is using someone else's $$$, and it always comes with strings attached.
You are right about FDR's New Deal. Incredibly socialist, and it has led us to a society of people who have no confidence in their ability to handle their own problems. Instead they depend on the government to support them and tell them what to do. I agree that America probably wouldn't be the same today without it. I would hope that we would have been be more self-reliant, and better thinkers.
About the free lunch, my point isn't so much that people are looking for one as it is that people have become *entitled* to one. They expect one because they *deserve* one without even recognizing that somebody, somewhere is paying for it.
I, too, am interested in ways to make things better for more people. We apparently disagree on how that can be done. I think it is better to teach them how to fish for themselves rather than to keep handing fish to them.
And that said... there is no disgrace in being poor or needy, as long as you don't make a career or lifestyle out of it. There was a time in my life when we had some tremendous medical bills, including uninsured open-heart surgery. On top of the medical bills, my husband, who was the one with the surgery, was out of work for a year, and we had two very young children.
During this time we applied for ss disability, food stamps, afdc, and whatever else we were aware of. Every application was denied. We never received one penny of government assistance, even though we had faithfully had our $ taken from us in the form of taxes. So I would say this is a system that definitely does not work.
We were helped by our families and some of the churches in town. My husband recovered; so far we have been able to pay off all but $10,000 of our debt, and we continue to pay our own way.
We also give away 10% of our gross income. Not that it is big bucks, but it is a lot to us. We want to help those who need help, but we want to determine where to give it.
I think "Republican" and "Change" should both be in quotation marks this election season. Which is why I voted for the Constitution Party (oh, I just realized this post is old -- in that case, I voted for Ron Paul in the caucuses). The Republican party is more of the same, but the change Obama speaks of is more of the same too -- bigger government and fewer personal liberties. The best change would be to downsize government (without quotation marks!), but that's so unpopular nowadays. At least, that's what I find working in education. And with the bailout and stimulus packages (supported by both main presidential candidates, and Bush!), it's not looking like it'll improve soon...
Post a Comment