English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Is having to endure THESE events not sacrifice enough? Were we living in the devil-may-care hands-off world of the '90s, there wouldn't be any concern for these issues.

2007-07-16 10:54:50 · 9 answers · asked by ? 6 in News & Events Current Events

9 answers

You're answer is a generalization. First, what do you mean by sacrifice? Conservatives also ask for sacrifice. If you don't believe that to be the case, then how do you justify the rhetoric surrounding the patriot act and the loss of certain civil rights for various groups of people?

As a liberal, I don't expect "sacrifice." What I believe is that there are certain things that human beings deserve. These things include affordable housing, health care, education, transportation, and food. I do not believe any person should have to work more than 40 hours a week and live in poverty or near-poverty. If by sacrifice you mean that there should be some level of taxation to assist people who cannot afford basic human needs, then I guess that is a sacrifice. Then again, I don't expect people who struggle to earn a living, or even those who earn a moderate living, to have to change their standard of living all that much.

I understand that the potential for earning wealth generates investment and in turn creates more production. I do not believe we should tax the upper classes to death. However, I do believe that an individual having to find contentment with say one Mercedes instead of two is not really that much of a sacrifice-- considering that there are some people who could probably live 3-5 years off the price of certain cars.

As for high gas prices and such, I blame conservatives for that. Specifically, we have a President and Vice President who are entrenched in the oil industry. It isn't surprising that gas prices are skyrocketing. Also, it is a bit odd that even as our economy is declining and gas companies are supposedly having all sorts of "disasters" to justify price hikes that Exxon-Mobile (I think that is the company) recently had the largest period of growth in the history of the world. Frankly, I believe (and history has shown this) that liberals are better at holding corporations accountable than conservatives. If these "sacrifices" are the ones that you are talking about, then I have a feeling these are the sacrifices you are making for a laissez faire economy, and not a liberal one.

2007-07-16 11:11:47 · answer #1 · answered by Matthew Nelson 2 · 2 2

Higher grocery prices are a result of higher gas prices. In the United States, however, gas prices aren't nearly as high as they should be. I'm tired of posting the same info over and over but the latest BP report estimates 40 years worth of crude left in the ground based on projected consumption levels (and the BP report is the de facto standard, not the product of some left wing or right wing agenda). We Americans suck up oil like its an endless resource (20.7 million barrels per day); how else are we going to get people to start conserving if not through higher gas prices? It's not like our leaders encourage people to trade in those monster trucks and SUVs for something a bit more in keeping with the reality of the situation. Our elders endured the Great Depression, and you call $3.00/gallon for gas a sacrifice? Please.

2007-07-16 11:20:22 · answer #2 · answered by Judy L 4 · 1 0

How do I classify higher gas/grocery prices? They fall in the category of higher profits for certain groups of people (farmers, businesses, oil companies) that have a tendency, for some reason, to support conservative Republican candidates and policies. Liberals certainly aren't calling for the lower and middle classes to sacrifice more of their income to support these already well-to-do segments of the economy. (And you forgot another "sacrifice" in this category: lower interest rates on savings . . .)

One example of sacrifice would be increased taxes to pay for the Iraq war instead of borrowing and passing on the costs to our children and grandchildren. As far as I know, Bush is the first President to not raise taxes in a time of war to help pay the costs. And I don't hear many supporters of the war volunteering to do their part by at least paying their portion. If you aren't willing to risk your life or your children's lives, but you are willing to have others risk theirs, you could at least "support the troops" with something more tangible than a ribbon on your car.

2007-07-16 13:16:44 · answer #3 · answered by ktd_73 4 · 1 0

Yes, it would support in slowing down worldwide warming slightly, nevertheless it additionally makes regularly the whole thing extra costly. For illustration, the rate of meals has skyrocketed within the final 12 months considering of the rate of delivery that meals by way of truck. On one hand, the emerging rate of gasoline does immediate humans to shop for extra effective automobiles and take a better seem at option fuels. On the opposite hand, the rate of gasoline emerging too prime too quick has the competencies to intent the US economic climate to break down earlier than we get to the factor that we do away with our dependence on oil (and to the humans claiming that worldwide warming is a fantasy, there are nonetheless PLENTY of different causes why our dependence on oil is a main issue, with out even bringing environmental issues into it). It's a high-quality stability. But generally, I believe you are correct, they are pandering to general opinion. I'm simply announcing that is no longer the one cause why a political candidate perhaps towards the emerging gasoline charges.

2016-09-05 13:45:42 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

We would not have these high gas prices, except for Geo.W. Bush! He owns all the oil companies, or is affilliated with them! Tell him to lower the gas price at the pump, and quit blaming Libs for Bush's mistakes and ego!

2007-07-23 02:50:11 · answer #5 · answered by jaded 4 · 0 0

Your logic escapes me.

Obscene profits for the oil and agribusiness sectors doesn't amount to a SHORT TERM sacrifice to make sure that a SPECIFIC task gets done.

Or do you not understand???

2007-07-16 12:14:53 · answer #6 · answered by nora22000 7 · 0 0

A sign of the times for EVERYONE.

Not just liberals.

Tight supply, high demand...$74.50 price per barrel for oil.

That usually translates into higher energy and food prices.

I'm surprised you haven't been complaining earlier about it. :0)

2007-07-16 11:10:56 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

They mean of course sacrifice by others..

2007-07-16 11:00:14 · answer #8 · answered by DrB 7 · 1 1

you bet ye.

2007-07-16 11:28:05 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers