Who would pay for all their social programs?
2007-07-24
10:16:42
·
21 answers
·
asked by
Mr. Perfect
5
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
LOL @ Runn... there is always a catch huh?
2007-07-24
10:36:53 ·
update #1
Dart... one of my close friends has a blood disorder called Hemophelia. I have helped him throughout our friendship. Some days are extremely difficult for him as his case is advanced. YET, he still has a job and still and still provides for his family by HIS own work. Why do libs assume that just becasue Conservatives want to eliminate MOST... not all... most of the useless social programs that we just want to turn a blind eye to those in need?
2007-07-24
10:42:29 ·
update #2
Peaches... just open your eyes wide and look into politics. All the proof you need is right there.
Whay is California losing so much of its industry? High taxes? rolling blackouts becasue they can't generate enough energy for their own state? or could it be all the regulations placed on businesses and they find it easier to run their business elsewhere?
2007-07-24
10:46:07 ·
update #3
Teacher..
When you actually post a question that has any basis to it and doesn't sound like it comes from an 8 year old on the playground... I'll spend a little time answering. For now you just get this... no, one party would never be good for the nation and all LEGAL non-criminals should be aloud to vote.
Next...
2007-07-24
10:49:39 ·
update #4
Teacher... try reading my answers and questions before assuming you know anything about my stances. If government were to go too far in either direction it would be problematic. Yes, I happen to think conservatism falls more in line with the middle than does liberalism. The whole idea of capitalism is to "compete" in the marketplace... in order to compete, there must be an oppoenent. Don't be so foolish and small minded to think that any party holds all the answers or that you need to be "all or nothing" with the party you back. I wish the republicans would have grown a backbone and fought terrorism like it should have been fought, unfolding to the politically correct media, they spend WAY too much and they should have a bigger backbone when it comes to the border and illegals.
Even still... if you actually read and understood the question or the point to the question... which you still have not answered.. what does this have to do with single party politics?
2007-07-24
12:14:23 ·
update #5
Matt... stop making sense.... you....
2007-07-24
17:16:44 ·
update #6
Teacher...
It is well obvious that by your third response now... and no you did not get lucky... you still missed it even though I made it quite clear. Take the blinders off and open your eyes. I will give you one HUGE example. Just take the time to look around and see what libs want to do to companies like... Exxon, Haliburton, Wal Mart, Home Depot, Microsoft and the list goes on. They hold rallies to ban these companies from entering communities, they want to tax them more and more (to have the "rich" pay for everything), they apply affirmative action to the private industry (nevermind about being qualified, you have incompetent people throughout the workfield who can't be fired or it is extremely costly to do it), they want minimum wage raised to the point that small businesses can't funtion, they have unions that want so much it is choking the life out of companies like GM and Ford.... IS ANYTHING SINKING IN YET? You let me know if you get it yet.
2007-07-25
09:32:59 ·
update #7
Teacher...
Even my child can detect sarcasm. So I'll slow it down for you.... and give you a hint... (there was sarcam in the question) However, the question made the point and if they aren't careful it could become that serious. Funny how you chose to focus on two words without looking at the whole question. Do friends need to explain all humorous situations to you?
See this here is for big kids that can understand what is being asked. Perhaps you should start in the entertainment section and work your way up captain literal....
Thanks for playing anyhow...
2007-07-25
18:27:06 ·
update #8
Oh my dear, surely you jest? the Libs would just raise taxes. AFter all, the rich are too rich. They need to be taxed back to reality and realize that Social programs are what make America Great. Just as the Illegals that get them!!!! Its the best things since sliced bread.
We will pay for them. and Pay. and pay. until we can't pay any more. then they'll cut the Military and spend that money on more social programs
2007-07-24 10:21:58
·
answer #1
·
answered by Mr. Cellophane 6
·
7⤊
2⤋
Perhaps that is the reason countries like Sweden have 30% unemployment, massive welfare roles, and wait-in-line socialized medicine. Socialism isnt good for business and if the US lets liberals have their way, theyre just going to flock to other countries. you keep taxes low to encourage business reinvestment and location. You jack up taxes to pay for a bunch of BS programs, they hit the road and suddenly the people that want to work are left without jobs.
2007-07-24 19:37:53
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
NOTICE the answer the educator Pop gave::
**Retired public school teacher. High school special education. Coached football 22 years, wrestling 8 yrs., swimming 3 yrs, track 4yrs., baseball 1yr
US Army veteran. 1966-68. First Cavalry Division, Viet Nam 19966-67**.
"What a stupid question. Typical right wing conservative. If you people had brains it would be amazing. I'm sure all the right wing conservatives think this is really a funny question. Typical! "
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
that answer is endemic of what is teaching our kids today..I am bookmarking this question..the next time I hear a whine about teachers being bashed..
**********************************************************
yeah..who would???...it didn't work in the Soviet Union they had a slave class..and purged millions...I imagine these clowns would have something to say about how hard I work under their thumb
2007-07-24 17:21:34
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
[Yawn] Do you wish that there was only one party ? Why don't you move to Iran then. They have only one party there. I'm sure you'll be very happy there. A question for you. If the Republicans got their way who will able to vote, or for that matter breathe, in the post nuclear holocaust ?
2007-07-24 17:36:18
·
answer #4
·
answered by Teacher 4
·
0⤊
2⤋
Who said that destroying capitalism is the goal? Don't you think someone like Warren Buffet who's considered a liberal "Kingmaker" would have a problem with that since he's made BILLIONS in the system? Go back to the drawing board and try again.
2007-07-24 17:22:53
·
answer #5
·
answered by Deep Thought 5
·
3⤊
3⤋
That's the point of socialism -- the people pay for it, either by taxes or by purchasing the products produced by the govt.
Capitalism is where all property ownership can be private. Socialism has the govt owning or managing production (farms, factories, etc). So, either way, the govt has an income to pay for social programs.
But it's not all liberals who approve of socialism, or of large govt spending -- just socialists. The two terms are not interchangeable, even if there is some overlap.
2007-07-24 17:21:15
·
answer #6
·
answered by coragryph 7
·
1⤊
5⤋
umm...liberals don't want to destroy capitalism. i believe you are talking about the extreme left i.e. socialims/communism. liberals at least in america understand the necessity for capitalism in regards to taxes and social welfare programs.
2007-07-24 17:23:03
·
answer #7
·
answered by shdw313 3
·
4⤊
1⤋
They would say, 'The Government will pay for it'. Forgetting that the Government doesn't generate a single penny for itself, but rather lives off of our money like a parasite. Never forget, when the parasite gets too greedy, it kills the host.
2007-07-24 17:21:27
·
answer #8
·
answered by Dekardkain 3
·
4⤊
3⤋
Libs want to destroy capitalism? Get real. What if you were disabled at a young age, and needed social security/disability? Would you still be complaining about social programs?
2007-07-24 17:21:40
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
5⤋
They won't destroy it all, since government produces no goods or services on its own. As someone above pointed out... the host/parasite analogy is apt. They won't kill the host, but will bleed it as much as they can.
2007-07-24 17:30:35
·
answer #10
·
answered by nileslad 6
·
0⤊
4⤋