Republicans/Conservatives answer this please?

Question

You jackassess are always saying the govermant does not owe anybody anything so think about this. Their is an estimated 280 million people in the us. Is their 280 million jobs that pay atleast $20 an hour with excellent medical insurance and a great retirment package, so this way we could cut out all social programs and people could support theirselves think about that before you start judging people you damn redneck basttards

Answer 1

I am neither a Republican, nor a conservative, and my status as a redneck bastard is questionable, but your understanding of economics is limited.

280 million full-time jobs paying twenty dollars an hour would cost employers over $11 trillion in annual salaries (that doesn't count insurance coverage, retirement, other payroll costs, dividends, or any kind of overhead costs). The US gross domestic product is just over $11 trillion.

Income level is not a problem. Income level compared to cost of living is. Education, consumer organization, and labor protection are the answer to America's financial problems. Welfare is like putting a bandaid on a gunshot wound.

Answer 2

Sigh...another anger management issue, coupled with spelling and grammar issues. But let's see if we can make some sense of this drivel...

First of all, although there are indeed roughly 280 million Americans, they're hardly all of working age, so the remark about 280 million jobs makes no sense.

Next, if every job paid at least $20 an hour, everything else would cost quite a bit more. I have a car with a 12½ gallon gas tank; if everyone made $20/hr, it would probably cost about $100 to fill it. I've explained this repeatedly in answers to questions about the minimum wage.

Third, I have no problem with a modest social "safety net", as Reagan called it, to help out those who are down on their luck. However, it's supposed to be a temporary thing to help people get back on their feet, not a way of life. If you look at the federal budget for social programs and can call that "modest" with a straight face, you oughta play poker.

And finally, in response to "think about that before you start judging people you damn redneck basttards"...Sounds like the pot and the kettle to me.

I will pray for you, that you let all your anger and hatred go and find love and peace in your life. Thanks for playing, and God bless.

Answer 3

I can't speak for all Republicans, but I can speak for most conservatives. Nobody opposes helping people. What we oppose is that help being controlled by the government. We believe that the better way is to use the private sector to help people. There are several reasons for this, but I don't have a lot of time so I'll try to summarize some of the most important:

1. Competition. The government is a monopoly. If I am forced to give them money, and they waste it, what can I do? Being a monopoly, there are no other choices; my money will continue to be taken and wasted. In the private sector, I have choices. If I choose to give my money to someone (Red Cross for example) and they waste it, then I can choose to give it to somebody else (United Way, Salvation Army, etc.).

2. Freedom. Are we the land of the free or not? How is it freedom to be forced to participate in the government's health program, retirement program, etc? Don't I have the right to choose my own retirement and healthcare?

You should put some thougth into what you propose. Do you really want politicians deciding who lives and dies? Do you want politicians deciding who eats and how much? Do you want politicians deciding who retires, when you retire, and how much you get? Or do you want the freedom to decide these things for yourself?

"Without choice there is no democracy"

Answer 4

How many of those 280 million people are capable of working? You can't use that figure as a total of all Americans because it takes into account children and elderly people that don't work. So, once we knock that number down to realistic figures, it still wouldn't make a difference how much you paid per hour. The cost of goods and services would increase to adjust for wages. You'd still have to have government mandates for wages to keep them at $20 an hour and provide healthcare, and that's what conservatives are trying to avoid, government mandates. It cripples the economy. In order to make up for the increase in wages and the cost of healthcare, companies would have to raise prices, and we'd be right back where we started. Why can't you understand that? Liberalism means LESS GOVERNMENT CONTROL, not more. Look it up.

Answer 5

The government owes you the right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness", nothing more. Even if there were 280 million jobs out there paying and offering that extra package you want, there would be 3 or 5 million people unwilling to work some of those jobs due to habitual slackards, mentally and physically incapable people, and those who only want to do things illegal anyway. Calling people rednecks and jackasses only goes to show how truly illiterate you are when it comes to understanding how the real world works to protect idiots like you.

Answer 6

There is 300 million estimated Americans, also probably about 180 million who are workable (16-65). Plus there is this great thing called a free-market and capitalism which rewards certain jobs greater benefits because of the scarcity of them. It's simple economics no mystery, the key is to aknowledge that and plan a way to make a good living (which is easy for anyone to do). Don't get mad that there are lazy people who prefer the government's hand. This slows our economic growth, and that is pretty much why I stay republican/conservative.

Answer 7

Just because you can't find a job that doesn't involve a paper hat and the question, "Would you like fries with that?" doesn't make us jackasses or bastards.

This boils down to one thing - nobody has the right to decide that they have the right to a percentage of my earnings - right out of my pocket. Nor does the government have the right to take that money and give it to another person as charity.

That is unConstitutional, and can rightly be called 'theft'.

As for jobs and medical and retirement - those are personal issues - for which you need to plan to achieve. You have no right to take money from others' pockets to get what you desire. You have no moral or legal right to a percentage of their paycheck.

You want something? Work for it.

Because the socialist society you obviously idealize eventually fails when it runs out of other peoples' money.

Answer 8

What exactly is your question? Oh, and by the way, you do realize that of the 280 Million people, some are children, some are retired and some are stay at home parents, right?

Answer 9

No one has Judged anyone.....you are the one who making judgements here. All the conservatives/repubs are doing is stopping the dependancy on the american government. All these social programs were SUPPOSED to be temporary for the citizens. But the democrats have done little to nothing to ugre the people utilizing them to become independant. Instead they bolster the programs to make them MORE dependant. That costs me as a tax payer more money. If you made poor decisions in your youth and now cant get a carreer with a good benefits....why should I pay for it?

Answer 10

As a *bleeding heart liberal* I say this system don't work because the average guy making 10 dollars an hour cannot keep up with rent, utilities, car insurance, car payments, gas at 3 dollars a gallon and food and clothes you tell me how it works? they're intentionally starving us out! Now you need to learn the Lords prayer and lets see Thy will be done on earth as it is in Heaven, all rewards are the same in Heaven, this system is set up to keep the fat happy and the poor guy so broke he cant pay attention.