We conservatives will pay for the Iraq war.
In return, you will pay for the stuff we don't use: social security, medicare, medicaid, etc.
Sound fair?
2007-02-10 06:40:57 · 25 answers · asked by WJ 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Glad you're on OUR Side, Willis. Let's meet at the Voting Booth at Election time! We're gonna need you, there!
2007-02-10 06:53:37 · answer #1 · answered by Goggles 7 · 1⤊ 6⤋
Social protection isn't a hand out. it is you money. actual, too a lot has been promised and that needs to be corrected (through promising a lot less, no longer taxing more beneficial) yet who between you, Liberal or Conservative is going to be satisfied with decrease than promised at the same time as they want or basically like it? through the way, the conventional SS earnings immediately is about $1100/mo. i don't understand too many those who ought to stay off basically that so it type of feels that it is a supplement. yet your common sense escapes me. How are authorities facilities (roads, infrastructure, public health, practise, regulation enforcement, etc.) a redistribution of wealth? How does your call to bypass out and earn more beneficial do some thing about figuring out to purchase more beneficial of those facilities? Going again to common sense, who needs unemployment and why would staying employed longer benefit that? both you're talking about unemployment reimbursement, or you meant to assert "a lot less unemployment". yet the following again, how does this volume to a redistribution of wealth? Unemployment insurance is basically that - insurance. it is paid for through agencies and is going to those who've lost their interest through no fault of their personal. i am going to guess that almost anybody amassing unemployment would quite be operating.
2016-12-04 00:15:42 · answer #2 · answered by england 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Trust me, I'm wise enough to know that's not going to work. It will result in even more tension than we have right now. The last thing we need is more division, and trying to decide who deserves what. Because who paid for what in the first place ? Is the country better because of benefits from social security or from the war ? How do we trace the cause and effect relationship ? We already have that problem. Let's not make it worse.
2007-02-10 06:48:28 · answer #3 · answered by Count Acumen 5 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Are you also going to pay for all the stuff you do use--like the subsidies on your mortgage, the tax shelters for your iRA, the subsidized college educations, the roads you drive on for free,
BTW--you can start by returning that $12 billion you left sitting in the middle of Baghdad.
No compormise--you neocons need to be driven out of office, out of power, and back into your trailer parks where you belong.
2007-02-10 06:54:25 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 0⤋
That reminds me of the story from the bible...the one where two women where claiming that a baby (America, in this case) was their own, and the issue was brought to King Solomon. His solution was very wise, the only fair way to solve the dispute was to cut the baby down the middle and give one half to each of the woman. One woman, said, Yes, Yes...that is the only fair way...the other said, "No, no...she can have the baby." King Solomon knew at the time who was the actual mother of the boy, and ruled in the second woman's favor.
To answer your question, a country divided will not stand...so no, I do not like your idea.
Compassionate conservativism, huh...really.
2007-02-10 06:54:15 · answer #5 · answered by ♥austingirl♥ 6 · 7⤊ 1⤋
You know Count Acumen nailed it.
I don't need your foul "compromise", I pay my own social security, medicare, medicaid and stuff ;-)
I hope you realize Conservatives need medicaid and a social security too ..... ;-)
EDIT : zclifton2's answer is just great, kudos to him.
2007-02-10 07:01:22 · answer #6 · answered by willow, the yodakitty from hell 7 · 7⤊ 0⤋
Who says that reps/cons don't use social security, medicare or medicaid? My grandfather is using Medicare and receives Social Security and he is definitely NOT a liberal.
Try again.
2007-02-10 06:46:45 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 10⤊ 0⤋
OK, but you have to get your pals to formally take you and all of them off the rolls at Social Security and all other government transferee programs. Also you have to reimburse parents and families of dead troops, and Pay compensation for the death you caused of a young Americans, plus further compensation for all the dead Vietnamese and Iraqi's killed in these two Wars of chose.
I sat down and figured the overall price, and you owe the American people every earned penny plus hard labor at minimum wage, 5.25 per hour for the rest of your shallow life
OK
2007-02-10 06:55:50 · answer #8 · answered by zclifton2 6 · 8⤊ 1⤋
No, not at all. Considering that Iraq is still going on you'll probably end up with the bigger bill anyways. Who pays for the orphaned children of troops killed in Iraq???
2007-02-10 06:45:46 · answer #9 · answered by Woody 2 · 7⤊ 0⤋
Yeah Sure
Like some RedsStater has a couple trillion dollars under the floor boards of his doublewide.
Go big Red Go
2007-02-10 07:10:46 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
You're not paying for it now, and your King George Dubya never met a spending bill he didn't like. Why should we trust you? Neocons are big on deficit spending, and low on fiscal conservatism and responsible budgeting.
Additionally...
The day I see a conservative senior citizen who turns down social security and medicare is the day that hell freezes over.
2007-02-10 06:45:43 · answer #11 · answered by Julia Sugarbaker 7 · 10⤊ 1⤋