The first law of Nature is the survival of the species. The highest priority for any society is the care of the next generation. Our Founding Liberals enshrined this priority in the preamble of our Constitution, which proclaims their ultimate goal: “to Promote the General Welfare and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and to our Posterity”. They knew that a nation without a thriving young generation is in serious danger.
Because children do not vote, Liberal priorities have wrongly favored the old instead of the young. Social Security should favor our youth instead of the retired. Medicare should favor growing families rather than unnaturally extending the last months of mere existence. Liberal priorities must be changed.
From conception until maturity, children must have all the health care, food, shelter, and play they need and as much education as they can absorb. A thriving young generation must include all of its children regardless of the wealth or poverty of their homes. Providing excellent care for only the children of the rich will not produce enough brilliant leaders in technology, industry, and government. If you want all the cream, you have to milk all the cows.
Programs financed by local taxes inevitably result in deprived areas, from Watts to Mississippi. Care of the young must be financed by a progressive federal income tax, not local and state tax. Just as banks and stock exchanges are controlled by the FED and the SEC, educational standards must be controled by a federal board of education rather than local politicians. (Children in Kansas should also learn about Evolution.) Commensurate with their means, all Americans, together as one, must share the load.
Conservatives (including most so-called "Libertarians") hold the opposite view. They believe children should be rewarded or punished depending on how well or how poorly they choose their parents. They want the care of the young to be financed by local taxes. Instead of taxing wealthy estates, consisting mostly of untaxed capital gains, they would rather endow the least productive segment of society: children of the rich. They believe the tax burden should be shifted from the rich to the middle class, from capital to labor. They would create a polarized generation: a small aristocracy and a large underclass - a lost generation. Conservatism is a crime against Nature.
Conservative priorities, which dominate our nation through outright purchase of politicians, are inimical to “The General Welfare”. As an example, the “moral” Conservatives legalize the really harmful drugs, tobacco and alcohol, but criminalize opiates and marijuana. This stupid repetition of the failed prohibition laws creates the lucrative drug traffic that tempt the poor. Then, to save a few addicts, they spend enormous sums enforcing drug laws that imprison and felonize millions.
Why do poor and working people vote for Conservatives? Unfortunately, democracy has a basic flaw: by definition, half of all adults have below-average intelligence, leaving them prey to bible-toting, flag-waving demagogues whose stock-in-trade is opposition to government. And among the more intelligent half, many are uneducated and misinformed because Conservatives control school funding and own most of the means of communication - a vicious circle.
The circle must be broken by making “Kids First” the Liberal Credo! Nobody votes against kids.
2007-11-18 17:20:27
·
answer #1
·
answered by marvinsussman@sbcglobal.net 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes that's one of their main problems. The rhetoric about taxes is a very powerful weapon in the hands of the American right while like most rhetoric it's empty and not based on facts. They want to underfund essential government services and then use the inevitable bad service as an example why the funding should be even less. That's the scheme but most Americans know this as the low taxes talk which most unfortunately love. If he promised massive tax cuts I'm afraid Osama himself could get elected in America
2007-11-18 00:41:28
·
answer #2
·
answered by justgoodfolk 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
The nine/eleven Commission's fairy story did not even point out WTC 7 NIST can not provide an explanation for nine/eleven (hearth surely no longer the intent of the cave in they admit it) Fire can not soften or weaken metal adequate to break down Guliani stuck in WTC 7 lie (he stated it fell in levels) plus he admited he was once pre-warned the dual towers could cave in The BBC and the CNN each mentioned that WTC 7 collapsed earlier than it did That's adequate for me and so much intelligence humans to name it a conspiracy
2016-09-05 08:10:41
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Income tax did not exist until it was invented in Britain to help pay for a war against France. It remained low (and was nearly eliminated in 1840). Thus UK was once the richest, healthiest and free-est country in the world, without high taxation. So, I bounce the ball back to your court: justify a pro-tax conspiracy.
Surely you have travelled on a toll road, or once hired a security guard?
2007-11-18 00:44:01
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think you'll find the people you hold in question have no problem paying taxes for the reasons you cite. I believe you find resistance when the Government uses their tax dollars in ways they don't support. Don't get me wrong, there will always be people that need help. And we're happy to help, BUT....
oh, lets say....
"A study of the mating habits of the purple crested dung beetle."
"Giving support to people would otherwise be forced to do something drastic like get a job, rely on their relatives if they can't work, give up cable TV and the Internet, live within their means..."
The US spends 60% of it's tax revenues on "Social Programs." Enough is enough.
600 (B)illion of the anual budget is spent on social welfare programs... and the only thing the Liberals want to cut spending in is the Military... which is roughly 12% of the annual budget.
Warm regards,
Douglas
Post Script: Judging from your Avitar you've already surrendered your national identity to the EU. Most Americans would never consider such a thing.
2007-11-18 00:15:38
·
answer #5
·
answered by prancinglion 5
·
1⤊
2⤋
Bush want 200 billion without controls for the endless war and.... (CNN morning news)
The winner are : Blackwater and somethigs like that, The men of Irak governement , and THE other OF THE OTHERS...
The looser are :....The dollar, the social security, the 89 % of the americans.
Support our troops, bring them at home. Make peace with the world. Nobody hate us
2007-11-18 01:01:31
·
answer #6
·
answered by timoteo 2
·
1⤊
0⤋