The Case for Republican Economic Sabotage
- Thread starter Bfgrn
- Start date
poet
Banned
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Yes, we're ignorant, poet... yet we are totally schooling ALL of you liberals on the Constitution.
Wonder what that makes you?
apple0154
MEOW
I'm not quite sure what you're inferring when you write, "Where is the conservative "lack of empathy" that leads people to actually get out and put their own money and sweat where there mouth is, as opposed to those who sit back with the opinion it's the government's job?"
It is the job of the government who have been paid to do the job. Paid by people's money who earned it through sweat, in some cases. Would you want your neighbor to be responsible for putting out a fire in your home or would you prefer the fire department with trained personnel?
If Conservatives are so generous why the objection to taxes going towards helping others? Who is more qualified to help; people who have helped others in similar situations or some guy who thinks he knows what type of help is necessary?
And what type of help are we talking about? The vast majority of help people require is financial unless you're saying Conservatives tend to offer to pay a person's bills and have them over for dinner every night.
And most people don't like to broadcast their troubles around the community. It seems the Conservative prefers the needy to knock on doors or perhaps beg on the street corner. How else is one to know their neighbor or the family down the block requires help?
This isn't the 1800's and we're not talking barn-raising or dropping off half a butchered pig so the family can eat.
So, the question is, "If Conservatives are so generous why the objection to giving ones share to the government and let the government give to the needy?"
Good Luck
New member
I am asking the person who made the statement that conservatives lack empathy where that lack is when you can constantly find conservatives putting in their own sweat and money helping others out.
Quit being deliberately stupid. Of course it is the jobs of professionals when dealing with things like house fires and other first-response type emergencies. OTOH, what about AFTER the fire is out? What about AFTER the tornado is past, and there is a half-mile wide path of utter destruction? Do we sit on our collective asses and say "that's the government's job" then? Conservatives certainly do NOT believe in that. I would think liberals would not think that way either, yet statistics prove me wrong. People who identify themselves with conservative principles are significantly more likely to put in their own time - and money - than are those who identify with liberal principles.
It is funny you would ask this question this way, because the obvious answer is the person who knows and is familiar with the situation. But, unlike the way you INTENDED to ask the question, the phrase "some guy who THINKS he knows what type of help is necessary" DIRECTLY represents the impersonality that comes with the standard one-size-fits-all government assistance program, whereas the people who have helped other in similar situations are the friends and neighbors, coworkers and congregation members who actually know the people who are in need, know what their need is BECAUSE they are friends, neighbors, etc. Your question is perfect, except I am certain you meant for the definitions of who-is-who to be reversed. Conservatives do not like high taxes going to government programs because government programs are invariably wasteful, invariably create a bureaucracy which needs support from much of that tax money which is SUPPOSED to be going to help people, and are invariably impersonal, impractical, often providing the WRONG kind of help because not everyone fits into the one-size-fits-all mandates of such programs. Additionally, the vast majority of "assistance" programs are designed to be traps from which it is very difficult to break free of without deliberately lowering one's standard of living. This mis-design is so prevalent, and so consistent, there is no way in HELL the trap design can be accidental. Those who create them WANT people to be dependent on them, because that creates their power base.
First, a lot of the help IS financial. Every Sunday as we leave from Mass, hundreds of people pause at the community offertory and put in a few dollars each. That money goes directly to church-run assistance programs, helping people with things like rent, groceries, heat, even gas for their cars. Second, a lot of assistance need NOT be financial. If a person needs help because their car breaks down, there are people out there who provide free mechanics assistance, or free plumbing, or even free dental work through various community help organizations like LOVE, INC. (LOVE In-Christ). In short, yes, people DO do things like help others pay their bills, and while inviting them home to dinner may not be all that common (though not unknown either) they DO provide people in need with food. We have two large boxes, about 5 cubic feet each, in the entry way of our church. They are invariably filled to capacity - and often more - by the last mass each Sunday. Additionally, we don't make them qualify for the help we provide. All they need do is ask. And unlike the lies told about faith based programs, they also do not need be of our faith to get the help they need.
Where DO you get your bullshit from? Is there a manual of anti-conservative liberal lies, or do you make this kind of shit up yourself?
In many cases we know who needs help BECAUSE they are our neighbors, friends, coworkers, etc. I know that in your perfect little liberal world, people don't bother getting to know those around them. That is not how conservatives behave. We ENJOY getting to know those around us.
And, no, for those whom we do not know, we don't "make them beg" you lying sack of shit. (You DO like to demonize conservatives, don't you? Do you not get TIRED of the lies you have to come up with to support your demonization preconceptions?) We have organizations, such as the LOVE, INC. I mentioned earlier, where people can request assistance at least, if not more anonymously as those who go in and fill out the reams of government paperwork to get on government programs. And I can guarantee the volunteers at LOVE, INC. will treat those in need a hell of a lot better than your average government functionary.
No, this is the 21st century, in which organizations like Habitat for Humanity use volunteer labor and donated materials to build people new homes. This is teh 21st century when church based and community run food banks hand out donated food to people, no questions asked. This is the 21st century where doctors volunteer to work in free clinics after their normal day at the office or hospital. This is the 21st century when volunteer professionals fix cars, plumbing, appliances, teeth, even wire a network so someone can start up a home-base online business.
Already answered. Because the government almost invariably fucks it up, wastes 80% of the money gathered for helping people on bloated bureacracies, and uses their assistance programs to trap people into a system which they then feel obligated to politically support.
Last edited:
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Because it is not the Constitutional responsibility of our government to "help the needy" ...that is charity, and there is an entire segment of society devoted to providing charity to all.This was the beauty of our original government design, the Freedom of Religion aspect, allows religious freedom to thrive, and through religious freedom, hope, love, and charity emerge. Through community outreach, volunteers on the local level (do you Do 5?) ...I do. As responsible citizens, we should all strive to help people in need, and there should be no need for our government to have to provide this, other than suspending tax burdens on the people who are trying to help.
Last edited:
cancel2 2022
Canceled
Did you ever write scripts for the Waltons?
Bfgrn
New member
Ah, the LIE that has gone viral in the right wing echo chamber...
BUT...
THE Arthur Brooks study
Arthur Brooks writes: "When it comes to giving or not giving, conservatives and liberals look a lot alike. Conservative people are a percentage point or two more likely to give money each year than liberal people, but a percentage point or so less likely to volunteer [citing the 2002 General Social Survey (GSS) and the 2000 Social Capital Community Benchmark Survey (SCCBS)]". (pp. 21-22)
So, according to THE Arthur Brooks study: conservatives believe in the giving of mammon (money) and liberals believe in the giving of themselves.
I hear on a daily basis the dismissal and demonizing of any group of Americans who don't fit the conservative model as 'worthwhile' humans. That includes ANYONE who needs a hand up, be it a poor person, an elderly person, a minority, a person who loses his job etc.
Translation...ANYONE who actually NEEDS help.
What right wing conservatives ALWAYS ignore is the human cost and capital. Their morally bankrupt punishments require some group of human beings to evaporate.
During the Great Depression conservatives raised the same objections to F.D.R.’s programs we hear today. They said the economy must be left alone and it would correct itself in the long run. Commerce Secretary Harry Hopkins shot back: “People don’t eat in the long run. They eat every day.”
Have you ever heard of a bleeding heart Republican?
Paul Craig Roberts - the father of Reaganomics
Incorrect Sir.
The question of how to remove the monied neo-con influence from the tea party has not been answered. If it has, at least point to the post# in which it was answered.
G
Guns Guns Guns
Guest
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Its funny how often I've heard Moot and Dune say to vote Republican is to vote against your own self interest.
Its funny how often I've heard Moot and Dune say to vote Republican is to vote against your own self interest.
You wouldn't think it was so funny if you read the article you linked to moron.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
How much volunteer time do you put in each week? (posting here doesn't qualify)
Alias
Banned
You can't remove the American people from participating in the political process. You might want to move to a dictator run nation if you don't want opposition. I'll chip in for your moving expenses since I'm a compassionate conservative.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
What you are asking is, essentially, how do we restrict the free speech rights for certain individuals who disagree with us politically? You see, money IS speech. those WITH money, have the ability to publish things, buy air time on radio and TV, promote their political ideas and fund campaigns, restricting their money restricts their right to free speech, and is a flagrant violation of the 1st Amendment. So you want to get around this by creating a boogey-man, that's where "neo-con influence" comes in. Then you want to pretend we are doing "good" by restricting these people's constitutional rights.
Let's get something clear you commie pinko assfart... ALL Americans have a right to express themselves politically! You have ZERO right to prevent that. This includes people you might not agree with, it also includes people I might not agree with.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
notice dune ran away from obama's half billion dollar political war chest....oooops
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
On the contrary, I think its hilarious. Tell me again what the Democrat Party has to offer you, in your best interest.
apple0154
MEOW
Here we go, again. I’ve explained this before but…
People are more mobile today meaning they do not stay in the same community. In the past people would personally contribute to their community at some point in time. That is not the case today so through taxes people contribute whether they are in the community a year or 10 years.
For example, Joe moves into the neighbourhood. Six months later a tornado passes through and causes damage to his home along with his neighbour’s. His neighbour has lived there for 20 years. Which person is likely to receive more help, Joe or his neighbour?
The other side of the coin is maybe Joe is the kind of guy who wouldn’t help anyone. The townsfolk rush to Joe’s aid, help him repair his home, the local garden center even donates a couple of shrubs and Joe’s home is looking better than it ever did. The following year Joe gets a job offer out of State and it’s “bye-bye folks.”
The “help” required is almost always financial and, again, people don’t like to have their business (poverty) discussed among friends, neighbors, coworkers and every other busybody in town. Your idea borders on a person having to beg. Anybody want to contribute shoes for his daughter? Pants for his son? Someone to help with the hydro bill?
Conservatives are the first ones to say people should take personal responsibility; yet, they are the ones who insist on narrowly defining programs. Because those programs are so narrowly defined (who qualifies) it results in more programs being necessary to cover those who don’t.
The ideal solution would be a guaranteed minimum income. In any case let the person receiving help decide how the help will be applied to their personal problems. Instead of food stamps and housing allowances and vouchers just give the person the funds and let them decide the best way to address their particular problem.
As for traps we have the same problem. The qualifications, the restrictions, due to trying to prevent abuse result in unwanted traps and that’s due to those who don’t want to help in the first place. They’re so afraid someone will get something for nothing the qualifications being so narrow a person can’t move without risking losing the help. That is not the fault of the Liberal.
Loosen the restrictions/qualifications and let people use their initiative to find ways to improve their lives without worrying if they’ll be cut off. Give the help willingly instead of trying to find ways to disqualify people.
Who is putting in the few dollars and food in the areas of town where most people are struggling to get by themselves? Your “program” is fine for a middle class community where the vast majority can afford to drop money in a box. Check out the “drop box” in the other side of town
I’ll tell you from where I get my “bullshit”. I get it from having seen children going to school in the winter wearing summer shoes and a torn dress. For a while I worked on mechanical systems at a school. I saw, first hand, poverty and it’s destruction.
Look, it’s fine to offer food and assistance but let’s try to be logical here. A tin of soup or a package of noodles isn’t going to go far. And why the hell should anyone be so destitute they have to go to a drop off center to pick up dinner?
It’s fine to offer assistance like plumbing and auto mechanics but we’re talking about every day living. Considering the overall standard of living here there is no reason some people have to endure such conditions on a daily basis.
Ahhh, that’s the Conservative attitude we’re used to seeing.
Do continue.Yes, I do demonize Conservatives because they are mostly the ones who rant and rave about people being lazy and taking advantage of the system. It is they, the Conservatives, who demand people fit the narrow circumstances before qualifying for help and the slightest change in a person’s circumstances leads to disqualification. It is they, the Conservatives, who through their miserly, begrudgingly way of helping results in the myriad of programs necessary.
As far as I’m aware one State has offered the opportunity for those on unemployment to take educational courses. Most places do not allow that because…well, because why should people be paid when going to school. Why should they get something for nothing? That is the thinking of businesses that pay a portion of Unemployment Insurance. Finally, someone garnered some common sense and realized it’s better for the unemployed to be learning rather then sitting at home or in the bar.
That’s just one example of the changes that are well overdue.
In this day and age for people to have to go to a drop off center to pick up food to feed their family is nothing short of shameful. To impose on the needy citizens, citizens of the richest country in the world, to show vouchers for food is degrading and to accuse them of laziness and abuse is disgusting.
Just consider how many can be fed on the money it costs to build one war plane. The cost of one plane could feed a village.
Perhaps you should reconsider who’s the sack of shit?
Just saying.
apple0154
MEOW
So this idea of insuring domestic Tranquility and promoting the general Welfare, and securing the Blessings of Liberty have nothing to do with people starving and dying due to a lack of medical care. Is that what you're saying?
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Listen Shit for brains, It was your hero, Smarter than Dixie who said steps were being taken to remove the neo-cons from the tea party. I call bullshit on that, and want to know what the steps are.