Answers for demands that Bush voters pay for his spending

from JoeUser Forums

Answers for demands that Bush voters should pay for his spending should be answered with demands that any one foolish enough to speak of voting for anyone on the liberal pandering side of aisle will pick up 100% of the costs for all of the programs that they are demanding or being promised.

I'm more than willing to pay for what Bush has spent with *MY* money, but I know damned well that the real hypocrites on the left are in no way prepared to pay the bills for any of their demands.  Gimme, gimme, gimme.  Give me your money so I can avoid paying mine.

The same hypocrisy echos through so ironically in an article that speaks of hypocrisy and yet demonstrates, yet again, how absolutely clueless and hopeless the writings of the liberal truly are.  Make Bush's voters pay for his spending.  Oh yeah, that sounds good.  But who will you make pay for the spending that originated from the likes of FDR, or LBJ or their compatriots?  Don't lay on that b.s. about how those programs pay for themselves because they don't.  They don't come near it when you factor inflation into the equation.

How about we make the clueless old geezers that prevented real reform of Social Security pay for the future generations that will be ripped off because of the lack of changes?  If we do that then the same clueless one would be crying the blues over having zero money to tap now after having paid in money in the past.  Do the reviews of the files for that individual though and you'd probably find that in a very short period of time (a few years at most) the money that someone pays into Social Security is all *gone* and they are in fact sucking up the money of those that will follow them into retirement.  So are we to go back to those individuals and take away more of *their money* to pay for their needs later?

Yeah, give me the opportunity to pay for Bush's spending.  I'll do so without complaint, provided the liberals will promise to pay 100% of the costs for Hillarycare, or Edwardscare, or Obamaspending, or whatever we get from the left should they win in the next election.

politics
2,243 views 3 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top

This is a very good point.

Let's look at the federal budget last year:

image

I'll happily pay for defense, international affairs.  I'll even pick up "other" (education, EPA, etc.) without flinching. And I will even pay for Medicare and Social Security even though it'll benefit me not at all. And even net interest payments.

Here is a "fair" system:

Take the cost of each program that takes money from one individual and gives it to another.

Then let each person pay for it so that we're all equally paying into such a system.

I support progressive taxation on governmental services (defense, courts, highways, etc.).  But the idea that "the majority" can vote to take from the minority to give to themselves is inherently corrupt.

If Gene and other socialist parasites think the government should provide health insurance to every child in this country, fine. Let him pay exactly the same amount as everyone else for that. 

 

Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top

I support progressive taxation on governmental services (defense, courts, highways, etc.). But the idea that "the majority" can vote to take from the minority to give to themselves is inherently corrupt.

Right there with you.  I'm happy to pay for the necessities (defense, justice and court system, road ways, etc.) and I'll even gladly help to pay a bit to help take care of my fellow man, but I really don't like the idea of being forced to pay into failing school systems, or being forced to pay for health care for people that can't seem to motivate themselves into finding work that offers them health benefits.

 

As an example of how things work in the big, real world, I work for a company that will, starting in the new year, no longer offer sick leave.  We'll get paid time off instead of sick leave.  Sick leave is being eliminated because too many people treated it like it was vacation or paid time off.  So, instead of sick leave for up to 10 days, we get 5 days of additional paid time off.  Now, as somoene that didn't abuse sick leave, I should be honored with the thought that I get 5 days of leave without having to have a medical reason to use it.  Except...  well, I do occassionally get sick.  I do have health issues to think about for the short and long term, and if I was going to be absent from work for a while I'd rather not use vacation time when I am legitimately sick.

A few bad apples ruined that though.

Go a little further and you see that my employer doesn't cover things like bereavement leave.  Well, again, in reality not that many companies do any more, but at the same time, my employer subcontracts to another company that offers sick leave and offers bereavement leave and more.

If the communists among us had their way the employees of the 'prime' would probably find that their benefits got cut fairly drastically so that the benefits for the littles could match the benefits for the bigs.  Why not improve the benefits for the littles?  Well, gee, that would be too expensive and who would pay for it.  Easier to just cut the benefits back all around.  Or do a mix of both.  Take more money from the prime, give it to the littles, improve their benefits a little but then watch the prime cut back on their benefits because they no longer have the profit margins they previously had and can't afford to offer up all of the same benefits they used to.

 

Sadly too many people in liberal land really do think that wealth is created out of thin air and that they should just be able to wave their law books and tax it all away so they can redistribute it where they see fit.  Since many are too stupid (Darwinism at it's best, or is that more like P.T. Barnum-ism) to earn their own money or make more of it for themselves, they look at others jealously and decide that it's the others that are being greedy.

I seem to recall that Jealousy is one of 7 deadly sins, but I'd be willing to bet the liberal crowd sure doesn't see it that way and are probably working right not to get the rule books changed in that regard.

ObjectDock - Access shortcuts and frequently used applications from an animated dock.
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top

Liberalism is driven by envy. And because envy is such a waste of energy, liberals tend to be much poorer.

Conservatives, by contrast, tend to be inspired by success and channel that into positive energy.

I can't say I've ever been jealous of what someone else has.  I've always been inspired by other people and continue to be. I like to think most people are that way.