Democratic debate

there is, working hard to create a better life for myself and my family. When i work i get allot of satifaction knowing that i have done a good job and helped out part of society. My summer job is working for the street department in my town, by doing a good job i know that i am helping my society and the people in it.
 


"my uncles maserati"

IMG}
 
while I resepct looking out for the well being of yourself and your family, which is very important, there is something said for looking at for the well being of the people you don't know.

Without question I would pay more taxes to know that everyone in this country has a better life. It would be a sacrifice, but one worth it IMO.
 
i think that there are better ways to take care of everyone than raising taxes. Private charities for instance, read Carnegie's social darwinism
 
hahaha ok. You can tell someone has nothing to say when their response is to go post pics from a kids profile.

I am talking like a snob? When I am saying I would

like to help out people in this country who need help?

Seriously....give me one example of how I am talking like a snob?

How much do you know about me...let see....jackshit. Am I rolling in bills and

wiping my ass with hundreds? Just because I have weathy family members

doesn't mean I am.

this whole conversation is pointless if you

are going to just use petty attacks to point out stuff that plays no

role in anything.

 
You get the money back anyway, because when you're 63 you can start getting social security so you break even there and using taxes so you don't have to drive on bumpy roads, or have no cool facilitys to go to.
 
Private charities are awesome, but the level of impact they are capable of is not even close to what could be accomplished if the federal gov't took control of certain things.

 
If the government wasn't using the money to do the things it said it would, then there would be a problem.

It would be nice to have a gov't we could actually trust
 
there is this huge issue of the baby boomers and enormously increasing need for geriatric care. it is expected that by 2040 it will take up to 30 years to regain socil security benefits in full. And seeing as how the life expectancy rate for humans is constantly growing the retirement age should be as well. But it will not rise to 67 until 2027, which is a long time, and isn't much.
 
i know there is a picture in your profile ofyou sitting in a family members maserati and your posting socialist views that the majority of americans cannot afford and then talking like its insane not to support that
 
Americans can afford it. They just need to wake up and realize that to be better as a whole, they may have to have a little less cash. shouldn't be that hard.

I never said it was insane...I just asked if you guys thought there was more to it all that hoarding money? Maybe there is something to be said for helping others. I can understand the need to want to have more money. It would be nice. I even said giving it up would be sacrificial, but that the sacrifice made by me so I have to buy less clothes, eat cheaper food, drive a more fuel efficient car, etc, would be worth knowing that in someway, somewhere someone who would be living in much shittier condition than I was would be having a better life.

You know...that whole for the greater good thing?

And for future NS -argument reference......pulling up a picture from someone profile is about as pathetic as it can get. if you want to come up with a real argument, do so. That is the point here. To debate, discuss, be fucking adult about this shit. it is a presidential debate, dont you think you could come up with something more than "well look...his comments are pointless because he is a snob because his uncle has a nice car....what a faggot..."

Pulling a picture of me from a family member I see maybe once a year saying that it proves I am a snob is fucking stupid.

Wanna pull picture of my car? Let me post them so you can do it and disucss how snobby and rich I am when I cruise around in my 99 subaru outback.
 
this word is overused and i hate to say it but you are ignorant. this country has a poor population because of liberal morons like obama. your dems funded this war, they are just as guilty as the neocons. socialisim always fails, and you actually sound more like a communist then a socialist. it is not this governments job to coddle its citizens. you can vote for that, but its wrong.
 
haha i never said you were a faggot. thats a lie. also sorry but judging by your pictures/profile which is a horrible thing to do apparently i gathered you were fairly well off and made the god awful mistake of choosing to call it "snobbyness" please forgive me lol
 
we are the wealthiest country in the world. I think the people that should be paying higher taxes are the people who have the money to do so.

I don't expect the poor to get poorer. And if the gov't gave them more assistance, they would be much better off than they are now.

It is the gov't job to assist citizens, all citizens, whether they be poor and wealthy. This current administration has shown time and time again that they are do not make an effort to help those who need it most.

I do agree that the democrats should take blame for the war in Iraq, but the way the Bush administration got us there was through lying and misleading everyone in the country. People now realize how much bullshit it was that we are there.

You keep posting stuff without backing it up. What am I saying that sounds communist?
 
also having a free market something Ron Paul seems alone in believing and not pre emptivley attacking other countries(something Obama and other republicrats might very well do) and getting rid of needless taxes, another thing RP is alone in believing is this country will prosper, not by giving everyone health insurance and making sure everyone gets an education and all these other bullshit entitlements.
 
yeah, screw name calling. instead go through their profile, find a picture of them, and use it to prove you point.

that is much more effective
 
what the fuck is so holy about profile pictures? whats the big deal its not like i even posted it. i smelled some hypocrisy, get over it. obviously your out of touch if you think all of america which is what you implied can affored to support liberal entitlements
 
Eleven, you must really not understand what you are talking about. Maybe you and your rich family would be able to survive in a non socialized country. But look at how horrible the class separation is in this country already. Let me put it in a way you might better understand: Do you really want to have to deal with homeless, poor, and sick people who can't afford health care?? Because the amount of them will only continue to grow as long as America so succesfully ignores its problems. Whatever happened to All for one and One for all??
 
i could be wrong, but i think that's the motto of the three musketeers, not the united states of america.

and show me a socialist country where the problem of class division has been overcome. soviet union? don't think so. china in the 50s? they learned their lesson when millions of chinese starved to death under mao's socialist "reforms" and are now only psuedo-communists.

 
well socialism is the economic system that usually goes hand-in-hand with a communist government. as for those examples, i believe britain is pretty capitalist, and do you seriously think there aren't class divisions in france? remember all those riots last year? on another note, it's much easier to make socialism work on a smaller scale, so it might be feasible for a country like switzerland or sweden, but give them 300 million people and let's see how well it works.

 
america is socialist too.. social secuirty? socialism is not about the economy, but the benefits of living in a country, for example, in america if you work and pay taxaes you have a right to social security. d in other western countries you pay taxes and recieve health care too. Class separation does exist everywhere. But i have lived in America and Europe, and it is not nearly as bad anywhere in western europe. and seeing as how america is the richest country in the world, it shouldnt be so bad.
 
i would say that socialism is about government ownership of the means of production and, in a purely socialist system, the abolition of private property. i think history has demonstrated the failure of the system on large scales.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top