Email from a friend...
The objective has always been to grow the government so it can vote for itself.
The bureaucrats need a large group of poor people to tend to. That is why public
education in minority areas is permitted to fail and why all welfare programs
a...re not designed to cure poverty, but to maintain our fellow citizens in
expensive (but unsafe) public housing, jails, substandard hospitals, and crime
ridden neighborhoods where they cant be free and their children are exposed to
3rd world levels of crime and drugs. Big Govt gives monetary incentives to have
a child out of wedlock vs a married 2 parent household, and then we wonder why
these children turn to gangs and other substitute authority figures? After
nearly 50 years of irrefutable evidence that traditional Big Govt solutions dont
work, can we finally develop a new approach and stop punishing the poor of this
country and help them be free?
14 comments:
Man, your friend sure is stupid, which is not surprising.
And as always you make an intelligent argument to counter the post. I like especially how you cite examples of successful liberal policies and now they have improved test scores and living conditions in poor areas (dem strongholds)
Your concern for poor people is touching, or would be if I believed it for a minute. A mother on welfare can expect about $90 in additional AFDC (Aid to Families with Dependent Children) benefits if she has another child. A child costs more than $90 a month. Where exactly is the incentive?
First off, mothers on welfare shouldn't be having more kids. Secondly, if you are stupid enough to have more kids while on welfare, then you think 90 bucks IS an incentive.
I can assure you, The Aurora have more concern for the poor of this nation than any single elected democrat. Weve all been poor and we didnt get out of the cycle by blaming others or relying on the government as libs instruct the poor to do now. Welfare creates more poor. Extending unemployement benefits creates more unemployed. Teachers unions create more dummies. All lib staples. Keep up the fail work.
Whereas cutting rich people's taxes solves all problems.
cutting taxes is one of many things that help solve problems.
i know i'm wasting my time here because you're not smart enough to understand this but the least efficient place to send your money is to the government.
"rich" people like me who will be affected by the expiration of the Bush tax cuts have already started cutting back on spending in anticipation of an increased tax bill.
"rich" people like small and even large business owners for that matter (job creators) have already started cutting back in anticipation of the an increased tax bill.
And so here we have the highest unemployment levels in decades and we're increasing taxes on the people who create jobs.
We have the worst economy that we've seen in decades and we're raising taxes on regular people.
In NY a married couple that are both public school teachers are easily in the top 5% of income earners. They don't live in mansions and they don't drive BMW's. The tax burden here is so huge that they're struggling.
This is not a hypothetical. I KNOW them. And now their taxes are going up.
Yes cut "rich" peoples taxes and everyone else who pays taxes. That will be more effective in getting the economy back than raising them.
Well the economy was better under the slightly higher upper tax rate under the Clinton administration. Raising taxes on the richest citizens back to that rate will lower the deficit. The problem is that the statistics show that, despite supply-side theory, the rich are getting richer and it isn't trickling down.
But whether the top tax rate should be 36 or 39% is a matter for the Congress to decide. If you lose that vote I hope you won't whine about it.
What statistics?
http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/are-the-rich-getting-richer-the-data-says-yes/19356546/
http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/the-u.s.-middle-class-is-being-wiped-out-here's-the-stats-to-prove-it-520657.html?tickers=%5EDJI,%5EGSPC,SPY,MCD,WMT,XRT,DIA
Interesting. I'm not sure these study's are relative. We're talking about getting the economy going not how much of an increase in pay or the rich getting richer. The issue is weather cutting taxes stimulates the economy more than raising taxes.
One thing I keep seeing is that a large number of Americans "live paycheck to paycheck" or "have "less than 10K saved up". That is their own damn fault living WAY beyond their means. Their credit card addiction has them up to their eyeballs in debt. That's why they are living paycheck to paycheck. I have no sympathy for them. Sell the damn $30K car, get a smaller house and stop pissing your money away. Been there done that. Now the only debt I have is my mortgage. 1.4 million bankruptcies??? I'll bet 1 million of them wouldn't of had to if they just lived within their means. They saw it as a free ticket. Guess who pays for all that? Us rich people. Why have the rich's salaries gone up so dam much??? BECAUSE WE HAVE TO PAY FOR ALL THE LAZY FUCKS WHO DON'T WANT TO WORK, ARE HERE ILLEGALLY, GO BANKRUPT AND KEEP CRYING THAT IT'S ALL OUR FAULT.
And then when you whine and belly-ache about it you get no sympathy. It just isn't fair.
The other problem is that the "Bush" tax cuts were across the board tax cuts. So EVERYONE who paid taxes got a cut, not just the "rich".
If Obama allows them to expire he is raising taxes on everyone who pays them and although he has already broken his no new taxes on the anyone who makes under 250k pledge, he hasn't done so directly with regard to income tax. If he allows this one to go then his critics can absolutely destroy him on it.
Therefore I don't think he will allow it to happen. I'm thinking they will stay in place.
Post a Comment