Dems would rather sit on their a@@ and let the governmet pay them than to get up and work.
Dems like to follow polls but notice they can't lead.
Dems support the poor but who has to pay taxes? The middle class gets stuck with the burden. Why? B/c the poor is too poor
and the rich is too rich. So each can avoid taxes.
If Dems were in office everyone would rely on the big government to take care of all their needs
2006-09-01 03:43:53 · 22 answers · asked by TJ 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Actually Enterrador i am working on my term paper for college and working on this. I also am pulling a full time job along with full time school. What about you?
2006-09-01 03:59:28 · update #1
Why does compassionate mean lazy?
Why can't people realize that diminishing the gap between rich and poor by helping the ones that maybe didn't have the same opportunities or just luck is actually good for the economy ?
2006-09-01 04:05:09 · answer #1 · answered by Jmyooooh 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
i don't know about some Dems, but I am, compared to some, liberal, and I am not all for unconditional welfare for whoever doesn't care to work.
Many of these social programs are for people who can't work, who are disabled mentally or physically, but I'm sure that's not what you're referring to.
How do you expect people to just Get Up and Work? They have to be offered a job... and most people that don't have one look for one. If they can't find one, eventually many do give up, and social programs should encourage them to keep looking... but if there are not enough jobs available, people still have the right to live and social programs are necessary. Social programs should come with a job; specifically my idea is a part-time production and part-time job training program for the poor, so they can build their own apartments, produce their own clothes, and other basic necessities, and receive job training as well. They will come out of this program ready to compete in the job market, and it only costs the taxpayer the start-up expenses and those of a few government employees.
The rich can avoid taxes because we refuse to demand campaign finance reform.
And why would a person want to work for a corporation making someone else rich while barely being able to feed themselves? We also need to institute a living wage.
And because of the policies of our corrupt government, and sorry but I blame Republicans for a lot of it, (let's say I blame the Republicans for their actions and the Democrats for their inaction) the middle class is disappearing as wages and employment go down... while the number of jobs may stay relatively the same, or even slightly increase, most of these jobs are entry level and cannot support a middle class family.
Would the Democrats do something about these problems? I have to say they probably wouldn't... but if they addressed these issues maybe they would start winning elections. Either way, don't expect the Republicans to help you, at least not until you get the thieves and murderers out of their party, and good luck, I hope you can.
2006-09-01 04:03:49 · answer #2 · answered by Aleksandr 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
TJ my man...
You seem to know your Neo cons ... so I ask you ... have a look at my Q&A's and if you want to answer the Leo Strauss question... i mean he should be the name on the tip of every neo con American out there, but not many of you have heard of him...
and really his influence on your society has been huge...
Thats al i will say for now....
In answer to your question...
My answer to your question:
Think about it if there were no "Dems' then you would not have a democracy, you need to have at least TWO parties for the political system to "work": so can you just accept tthat is how Governance works, and instead of griping about each other , work together to further Society... that is , after all the idea right?? and not to just argue about what you do not like , but to debate, and reconstruct what the people want..and achieve little???
How much money does each side spend every four years trying to keep, or get back into power.... ?
And how much of that could be better spent FOR US , rather than trying to compel us to vote for x or z
like so many things in politics the focus is all wrong..
The focus is always surrounding actual political misnomers,
where as if the real issues where actually addressed, then the world would not be so screwed up today...
I mean just for example... millions spent in war against iraq..., and we VERY nearly had a 5th Aniversary of Sep 11, in the form of 9 Jumbo jets getting blown out of the Sky, which could have topped the death count of 9/11, The real issue of countering islamic terrorsim, has been bypassed, while the issue in Iraq has got you into Trillions of pounds of debt, which is secured on your guys future Tax paymants, and it has compund INTEREST , and it is to countries like China, who are already threatening to take over the world in financial terms , within the next 20 years.. and now you owe them , and you guys will be paying for this war until you die, or retire, and guess what it HAS NOT MADE YOU ANY SAFER, in fact it has created another breeding ground for people who will want to cause more, and worse 9/11's in the future....
the point about Dem's is moot, when confronted with the sheer scale of ineptness which comes from the Republicans...!!!
enjoy the debt, and the prospect of your kids living in terror too??
we the rest of the world, do not, and did not condone the mesures taken in Iraq, and we and our governments acknowledge that the wolrd is actually a MORE dangerous place...
anyway...
whey up the Dems, way up the republicans..
The elite always rule , it matters not who controls the laws..
but who prints and controlls the money,,
2006-09-01 04:03:40 · answer #3 · answered by Mark 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Divinity !. Ofcourse good looks, great physique or merely dressing the perfect way does help. (i.e. from a in user-friendly terms actual attitude). yet, i admire to have faith that guy(human beings) are lots greater desirable than merely social animals. we many times tend to overlook that all of us have a ability to exist as spirit led beings. ( fantastically with the aid of over emphasis of vogue / good looks / materialism contained in the international ). ultimately, actual attributes will and can purely be actual or look aesthetic in a definite way. yet, that's the "soul of the female" which rather concerns. think of this, what use can a ideal determine or great looks or fancy clothing be if the female does no longer have a the two good character ?. it would only help her to be a intercourse-image isn't it ?. ( or in different words, a bimbo !. ) // Sorry women folk ! . . . // So, i assume that's a controversy of decision or opinion. think of if the female has a ideal character i.e. physique of ideas / character / a good soul . . . and on precise of that, she has great looks, or a great physique, or a good dressing experience. Now, that would incredibly be something. isn't it ?. whether she does not have all of those bodily beautiful attributes, yet nonetheless has a outstanding character, a heat, sort, and a ideal coronary heart, she could be ideal previous words. What i've got faith, is that, that's the Divinity interior a guy or woman that makes the guy ideal !. yet, i assume that's what "I" experience :) . . . some human beings could think of different clever ? . . . :) . . . Ex: i actually like Norah Jones. i think of she is my style of a woman :) . . .
2016-09-30 05:55:09 · answer #4 · answered by hobin 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
So nice how you lump everyone in who might benefit from programs that Democrats propose as people who sit on their a$$.
It never occurs to you that their are many people who are indeed working or who are unable to due to handicaps who could benefit from those programs.
Give me a break! Broad generalizations like this are why republicans lost credibility with me years ago.
2006-09-01 04:09:15 · answer #5 · answered by brian2412 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Amazing how intelligent you are!! You have no idea what you're talking about, anybody can set behind a keyboard and call people names. Where's your sources?? I'm a Democrat and fought for my country so people like you could run off at the mouth!
2006-09-01 04:23:34 · answer #6 · answered by carpediem 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Anyone else remember the last Dem in office? Anyone else even like the 90's?
I know repukes would rather be in a miserable economy and at war with some puny nation that can't possibly beat us...but always seems to find a way.
Dems support social programs that help people...not hand outs. I don't think people should be able to sit on their asses. But i don't think they should starve in the streets either. It's called the progress of a society and it's time for republicans to get out of the dark ages.
If we have 300 BILLION to spend on a war for no reason at all...we surely have some money for the nations poor, undereducated and people who cannot help themselves.
2006-09-01 03:51:48 · answer #7 · answered by Franklin 7 · 6⤊ 4⤋
So true, I mean look at me sitting on my ***, just like you... are you at work? If you are then why are you on here? Oh, because you rather bullshit around than actually work? Well if you really wanna know, I work as an IT for a company, I served 4 years in the military 2 1/2 in Iraq, I'm currently going to college to further expand my IT carrer and taking extra classes in Game Design, so yeah I'm lazy and an idiot aren't I.
2006-09-01 03:54:57 · answer #8 · answered by Enterrador 2 · 5⤊ 2⤋
already pulled the full time school and full time work. As for your question, I hope you have a more objective stance in your paper, unless the class is on 'how to write propaganda'.
2006-09-01 04:13:11 · answer #9 · answered by hichefheidi 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
your a sad sad person did you hear of corporate welfare the Tim ken Co. Made record profit last year yet thy receive 55 million dollar from our govt.for unfair trade Mr. Timken is also the ambassador to Germany and gave bush campaign 40,000 dollar you need to get fact before you write look at the public school fed money the roads
2006-09-01 04:04:54 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋