They want unfettered EVERYTHING and they dont care who gives it to them
2007-12-04 03:06:53
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
7⤋
Well let me see. They support tax breaks for corporations and the rich. They want all social programs that help the needy and the elderly to go away. They combat any wage increase proposal. I don't think that affects the rich much, do you? They feel that if you can't afford health insurance, then just die. Again, I don't think that is a problem for the rich. Now, to you and your friends that make under 30k a year. If you become disabled, and there was no Social Security Disability program, what would you do? Be honest with yourself. Your parents rich enough to live on their savings or do they need that SS check you hate so much? And the medicare? If there were no government aid would they have to choose between the necessities of life? I think you are the one that needs to think about the issues instead of using your emotions.
2007-12-04 11:40:43
·
answer #2
·
answered by grumpyoldman 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
It doesn't particularly matter what party "rich" people like lawyers, acrors etc. belong to. The real fact of the matter is the the GOP does favor the rich, and could care less about the working people/ Peroid! Put down the Kool Aid and think for yourself.
We believe it because it's true.
2007-12-04 11:21:05
·
answer #3
·
answered by hohn m 3
·
2⤊
1⤋
The evangelical fundie nuts also vote for the Republicans, as do the paranoid sheep who believe the terrorists are going to get them if they don't vote Republican, so it's just not rich. Hillary is for the rich too, by the way, look how she's raised all her campaign money.
2007-12-04 11:12:16
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
3⤋
For the same reason people think that the Bush tax cuts were for the rich.
I worked for the IRS during those years and for a tax accounting firm now. Almost all of the changes in the Revenue Code over the last 7 years benefited the poor and middle class, including the "Military Family Tax Relief Act" of 2003, the child tax credit increase, the saver's credit and the creation of a new and lower tax bracket for the poor.
The only two tax changes that affected the rich were the tax bracket reductions and the capital gains reduction, both of which helped the middle class as much or more than the rich.
This is just another example of the way liberals will lie about anything to express their irrational hatred when they don't get their way.
********************
Note to DSTR below:
During the Reagan years, unemployment went down (a lot) and inflation went down (a lot).
The reason why labor unions are in decline isn't because people aren't working, it's because people hate labor unions and no longer need them.
2007-12-04 11:10:47
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
7⤋
Yeah, I remember way back in high school when someone in the group said the same thing. I piped up and asked her if she'd ever heard of the Kennedys. That shut her up.
We are a family of 3, living on my husband's income, and we struggle as well. Both of us are Republicans--and he's a Puerto Rican--squashing another stereotype.
They also tend to think that we are less educated for some reason. I have a master's that I earned with a 4.0 and entry into the honors society for my profession. It's all liberal propaganda.
Democrats are LESS rich?! Tell that to the Kennedys, or Pelosi who owns a country club, or Al Gore.....PAHLEEZE!
2007-12-04 11:12:10
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
5⤋
seems to me you've been duped
if you are a republican and see merit in voting for a party that continually pushes for lower taxes for the haves while denying the have nots
you must be ill informed or easily persueded by the hate mongers
Funny thing about the dems---no matter how rich they get, they still don't forget where they came from and they still care about the have nots
Warren Buffet the worlds third richest man says he pays too little in taxes. He believes that Bushs tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans is wrong!!
He say that he pays less in taxes than his secretary (percentage of income)
He has challenged his millionaire and billionaire counterparts to prove that they pay more (percentage wise) than their secretarys
IF THEY PROVE IT HE WILL GIVE THEM $1 MILLION IN CASH
SO FAR NO TAKERS
2007-12-04 11:12:27
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
4⤋
okay since u know democrats are the richer party then why u cons support lowering taxes for the rich?also a report this year showed democrats actually have the most richest supporters then the republican party.and yet the democratic part openly support raising taxes on the rich,hillary clinton supported raising taxes on people who made more then 350,000 a year
2007-12-04 11:08:14
·
answer #8
·
answered by tyler "god of typos" 5
·
4⤊
4⤋
It is small wonder that so many of America's elite genuflect to Ronald Reagan and want to see his countenance emblazoned on the ten dollar bill. Reagan dropped a nuke on labor in the ongoing class war when he fired the PATCO air traffic controllers in 1981. When Reagan took office, union membership was 23%, down from its 35% peak in the 1950's. However, his withering blow greatly accelerated the precipitous decline of organized labor in the United States. By 2005 only 8% of America's private sector workforce was unionized.
Brute force, propaganda, illegal firings, and state-sponsored murder imposed by the ruling class in the United States were not enough to deter the American labor movement from its diligent efforts to improve the lot of the working class. We can thank them for the eight hour work day, an end to child labor, increased safety in the work place, higher wages, and health and retirement benefits.
Since the majority of the population is a part of the working class, a majority of people benefited from labor's gains. Sounds like a logical outcome in a nation which espouses democratic values. However, the minority in the ruling plutocracy was not pleased. Determined as they were to protect their interests, the modern day Money Changers discovered new ways to impose their economic brutality.
2007-12-04 11:11:09
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
6⤋
Both parties support the corporate masters that control the US. It's just that the Democrats kick back a small amount to the working class. (Like a bone for a dog)
A poor person voting for a Republican is like a missionary voting for the cannibal that has them in a pot.
2007-12-04 11:08:55
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
5⤋
Politicians, no matter what party, are all crooks. It is time for a leader who is about AMERICANS instead of putting more money into other countries.
2007-12-04 11:11:33
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
2⤋