Democrats in Congress really want to redistribute wealth. That is called socialism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Putting aside the fait accompli assumption in your statement that socialism is so automatically bad that once you've conclusively asserted it you've proved something, what you're describing is democratic government (taxing and spending). Socialism requires shared ownership and control over the means of production (wealth generation), which we don't have, as our society's means of production are all privately owned. Communism requires state-controlled shared means of production, which we also don't have, as the government is not involved in independently generating wealth or profiting from manufacturing.

Social welfare programs and government policies to minimize the impacts of wealth inequality rely on some principles of equity that socialism also relies on (everyone in society should have access to similar public resource and opportunities, there should be a baseline of general welfare below which nobody is allowed to fall, those systems upon which we all rely like roads, bridges, schools, and fire departments [doh!] should be well-maintained), but they are not the same.

It's ignorant to attempt to describe our democratic capitalist society as socialist, and small-minded to attempt to move from shared principles to a structural label that by definition doesn't apply. Which is totally separate from the facile judgment that even if we did move to a socialist democratic state, that would always and automatically be a terrible thing.[/ Stop posting and get back to work, assuming you are employed.

Don't go cluttering up OP's mind with, you know . . . facts. Glenn Beck has told her that a progressive tax system with modest social welfare programs = socialism, and will lead to the demise of the Republic and all that's good and pure in America. Didn't you know that the US operates on a pure capitalist system? Wait - it doesn't, you say? Blasphemy!

Oh my aren't you smug. Except these aren't facts. They're opinions that liberals believe to be fact. But as our failed welfare system has proven, when the government keeps giving more and more you just breed lazy generations that don't want to learn how to fish but want the government to give them the fish.

[Anonymous]

Why do Republicans think that the less money you make, the less productive you are? Are nurses that work 12 hour shifts less productive than lawyers, doctors and CEOs? Policemen? Teachers? Journalists? They are all less productive than you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've been on welfare for 3 months when I was laid off. I have a degree, work 6 days a week, make $60K/year, pay my own health insurance and my taxes.

I guess Republicans would rather us starve to death because my job doesn't make as much as theirs?

When you wrote this, did you really mean it? That's seriously how you view Republicans? If so, you should at least try a little to understand where they are coming from, especially since today is going to demonstrate that a lot of people are willing to vote for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why do Republicans think that the less money you make, the less productive you are? Are nurses that work 12 hour shifts less productive than lawyers, doctors and CEOs? Policemen? Teachers? Journalists? They are all less productive than you?

Right, Republicans are totally down on cops. That right there suggests that you are not thinking clearly about this issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've been on welfare for 3 months when I was laid off. I have a degree, work 6 days a week, make $60K/year, pay my own health insurance and my taxes.

I guess Republicans would rather us starve to death because my job doesn't make as much as theirs?

When you wrote this, did you really mean it? That's seriously how you view Republicans? If so, you should at least try a little to understand where they are coming from, especially since today is going to demonstrate that a lot of people are willing to vote for them.

Republicans vote to preserve (their) privilege. Simple as that.

[Anonymous]

If you bothered to read the third question in the survey you would realize how small taxes figured into the poll result

Unemployment is the overwhelming factor

Reading is Fundamental.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you don't think this election is about Obama and Congress and how far the pendulum has swung to the left then believe me Obama is bound to be a one termer who will suffer the same fate as Jimmy Carter. In just 2 years after your first majority in over a decade you've been bounced. I see another 20 in the wilderness. But go ahead and be the smug liberal that is out of touch with most of America.

You are projecting your belief system onto the current political climate. The polls say you are wrong. Here is an excerpt from yesterday's CNN poll:

Which of the following is the most important issue facing the country today?
The Economy: 52%
The federal budget deficit: 8%
Education: 8%
Health Care: 8%
Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan: 8%
Illegal Immigration: 8%
Terrorism: 4%
Energy and Environmental Policies: 4%
Other: 1%

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/10/31/5a.poll.release.pdf


It's still the economy, stupid. If you misread the lesson of the midterm elections, your boys are going to blow it all over again.

You do realize that the taxes are lumped in to the "economy" when we talk about it in the colloquial sense. I don't understand how someone can say with a straight face to the most productive people "Hey you need to take home less money because I'm going to forcibly take it away from you and give it to less productive people."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

You do realize that the taxes are lumped in to the "economy" when we talk about it in the colloquial sense. I don't understand how someone can say with a straight face to the most productive people "Hey you need to take home less money because I'm going to forcibly take it away from you and give it to less productive people."

Thank you, Marie Antoinnette. Give me a "Let them eat cake!" and the picture will be complete.....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do Republicans think that the less money you make, the less productive you are? Are nurses that work 12 hour shifts less productive than lawyers, doctors and CEOs? Policemen? Teachers? Journalists? They are all less productive than you?

Right, Republicans are totally down on cops. That right there suggests that you are not thinking clearly about this issue.

Umm, no, that's pretty much what the Republican she was responding to said. Look:

Democrats in Congress want to take more from the most productive and give to those who don't earn as much. And as tomorrow will show most Americans don't want that either.

That poster made a clear distinction between "most productive" and "don't earn as much." I don't think anyone would dispute that cops are in the "don't earn as much" category. So your quarrel is with your fellow travelers, not the poster you quoted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've been on welfare for 3 months when I was laid off. I have a degree, work 6 days a week, make $60K/year, pay my own health insurance and my taxes.

I guess Republicans would rather us starve to death because my job doesn't make as much as theirs?

When you wrote this, did you really mean it? That's seriously how you view Republicans? If so, you should at least try a little to understand where they are coming from, especially since today is going to demonstrate that a lot of people are willing to vote for them.

Republicans vote to preserve (their) privilege. Simple as that.

I'm glad that so many privileged people will be going to the polls today, then. Nothing I can say will persuade you to change this view, but perhaps checking the scoreboard tomorrow morning will prompt some more serious reflection.

I can admit that many of the Democrats mean well -- I just disagree with their views as to what good policy is. If you can't recognize the good in your political opponents, that says a lot more about you than it does about them, and it is also horribly ineffective as a matter of politics. As we are about to learn today.

[Anonymous]

OP, what do you call it when corporations get handouts? That's called the fleecing of America and one of the magazine news programs showcased it a few years back. I wanna say it was ABC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let's see TRICARE involves govt doctors caring for our soldiers at govt expense. MEDICARE involves private doctors caring for our seniors at govt expense. AGRICULTURE SUBSIDIES involves urban folks subsidizing rural folks. USPS involves urban rolks subsidizing rural folks on postage. Our TELECOMM policies involve urban folks subsidizing rural folks through federal taxes that fund rural telephone service. I wonder how many Republicans would stand up and VOTE AGAINST ALL OF THE FOREGOING. None. What hypocrites!! OBAMACARE involves private doctors caring for our children and uninsured at private expense with some public subsidies. Now, Republicans are against that on principle, of course.

I do not see too many Republicans agreeing to eliminate TRICARE, MEDICARE, FARM SUBSIDIES, etc. All talk!! No substance!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's see TRICARE involves govt doctors caring for our soldiers at govt expense. MEDICARE involves private doctors caring for our seniors at govt expense. AGRICULTURE SUBSIDIES involves urban folks subsidizing rural folks. USPS involves urban rolks subsidizing rural folks on postage. Our TELECOMM policies involve urban folks subsidizing rural folks through federal taxes that fund rural telephone service. I wonder how many Republicans would stand up and VOTE AGAINST ALL OF THE FOREGOING. None. What hypocrites!! OBAMACARE involves private doctors caring for our children and uninsured at private expense with some public subsidies. Now, Republicans are against that on principle, of course.

I do not see too many Republicans agreeing to eliminate TRICARE, MEDICARE, FARM SUBSIDIES, etc. All talk!! No substance!!

TRICARE = military (lean Republican)

MEDICARE = senior citizens (majority lean Republican)

FARM SUBSIDIES = conservative farmers (Republican)

Conservatives already get their handouts and want to maintain the status quo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do Republicans think that the less money you make, the less productive you are? Are nurses that work 12 hour shifts less productive than lawyers, doctors and CEOs? Policemen? Teachers? Journalists? They are all less productive than you?

Right, Republicans are totally down on cops. That right there suggests that you are not thinking clearly about this issue.

Umm, no, that's pretty much what the Republican she was responding to said. Look:

Democrats in Congress want to take more from the most productive and give to those who don't earn as much. And as tomorrow will show most Americans don't want that either.

That poster made a clear distinction between "most productive" and "don't earn as much." I don't think anyone would dispute that cops are in the "don't earn as much" category. So your quarrel is with your fellow travelers, not the poster you quoted.

That, I think, is a misreading that shows your simplistic understanding of the other side. The real issue is this -- how much redistribution of wealth do we want as a society? Everyone agrees that there should be some -- the Democrats want a lot more than Republicans. The Democrats' view seems, to me, to be that people really need it, others have it, so let's tax and redistribute it. That this message is not appealing to the majority in this country seems clear to me from the fact that the Democrats so often seek to conceal or divert attention from what is, essentially, a relatively straightforward point of view. E.g., Barrack Obama's "spread the wealth" comment during the campaign -- that is what he means and who he is, and I, at least, find it refreshing that it is so clear. Do you disagree that this is a priority of the Democrats? PP's phrasing was not nuanced and paints with broad strokes, but I think it is a pretty reasonable high-level summary of the policy priorities of the Democrats. If you are a Democrat, you might as well just embrace that -- hiding the point suggests that you are well aware that it is a political loser.

I'm on the opposite side, however, in that I think that beyond a relatively low minimum standard, the ethical case for redistribution is very weak compared to allowing people to benefit from the fruits of their own labor, and the level of regulation required to enforce such redistribution (such as health care reform) is counterproductive in many ways and is simply too coercive to be justified -- excessive regulation is, in my view, ultimately going to destroy the very thing it was intended to protect -- the right of people to go about their business freely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is going better for me than it's going for Democrats around the country. You can scream and holler and crack jokes but that doesn't take away from the point that Democrats in Congress want to take more from the most productive and give to those who don't earn as much. And as tomorrow will show most Americans don't want that either.

You must not follow politics very closely. What tomorrow will show is that there's a president of Party A in office, and Party B is doesn't have control of either house of congress during a mid-term election.

Well, actually, there's a good chance that the Democrats will hold more seats than the majority party has historically in this scenario. Especially in the middle of our Bush Recession and two decade-long Bush Wars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's see TRICARE involves govt doctors caring for our soldiers at govt expense. MEDICARE involves private doctors caring for our seniors at govt expense. AGRICULTURE SUBSIDIES involves urban folks subsidizing rural folks. USPS involves urban rolks subsidizing rural folks on postage. Our TELECOMM policies involve urban folks subsidizing rural folks through federal taxes that fund rural telephone service. I wonder how many Republicans would stand up and VOTE AGAINST ALL OF THE FOREGOING. None. What hypocrites!! OBAMACARE involves private doctors caring for our children and uninsured at private expense with some public subsidies. Now, Republicans are against that on principle, of course.

I do not see too many Republicans agreeing to eliminate TRICARE, MEDICARE, FARM SUBSIDIES, etc. All talk!! No substance!!

13:13 here. I freely concede this point. Too many Republicans talk the talk but don't walk the walk. It is not that the Republicans don't suck -- they surely do -- it is merely that at this point in time they suck less. I hope they recognize that they are only winning this election because people are angry at the Democrats, not because the Republicans have done anything good lately.