[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Myth Debunked! (Page 1 of 4)
Posted: 9/2/2007 8:26:13 AM EDT
|
We all know why we don't want Democrats in office. Here's why the Republican party is not the answer and why we need a third party, a real conservative party. Since the founding of the Republic in 1776 we have accumulated $9 Trillion in debt. 70% of that debt or over $ 6 Trillion was accumulated under 3 Presidents. Would you guess FDR, LBJ and Bill Clinton? Well you'd be wrong! It was Reagan, Bush and Bush. But, you say, good things were done under these 3 presidents. Undoubtedly, but with BORROWED money! Instead of raising taxes, they borrowed the money and now 50% of every tax dollar collected goes to finance that debt. If you pay as you go, you don't get killed by the interest later. But we all know that, why don't they? So there goes the myth of the fiscally conservative Republican. All the democratic welfare programs are just a drop in the bucket compared to the borrow and spend policies of the Republicans. All the no more taxes rhetoric is just BS. They don't raise taxes they just borrow the money so that later on someone must raise taxes to pay the interest. So if you are anti-abortion and even though the Republicans never actually change the law you want to vote for them, go ahead. And if you are pro-foreign war and you enjoy seeing the military in the papers every night, keep voting Republican. If you hate gays and want to vote for the guys who won't let them get married, vote Republican. If you think the world was created just 6,000 years ago by an invisible mastermind, vote Republican. But if you are a conservative and want to get back to the real conservative values of lower taxes, fiscal responsibility and smaller government minding its own business, then we need to be thinking third party. Perhaps Ron Paul is not the answer, but he'll have to do until someone better comes along. We need to let people know that there can be an alternative to dumb and dumber. |
You sound like a Democrat. You know Jim, I'm one of those guys you think are stupid because I believe in what you call "an invisible mastermind". If you think I'm stupid, why would I want to listen to what else you think? |
|
Are you really that dense? If so, explaining the Laffer Curve would be impossible. Fair enough, last year, the Federal government had THE LARGEST TAX REVENUE EVEN WITH THE TAX CUTS OF BUSH. Now if CONGRESS would rein in spending to BALANCE the budget, all would be saved. This would mean an end to "earmarks" and a decrease in the growth of federal programs. You BALANCE a budget with SPENDING, not TAXATION. |
|
I never understood whats so bad with debt. I have it, and I'm doing fine. 9 trillion dollars seems like so much money because not one of us will ever see it. But lets do some math. There are about 281,421,906 people in the U.S. The average median income for the U.S. is a little over $44,000 a year, so we earn $12,382,563,864,000. Over 12 trillion a year! 9 trillion dollars isn't a whole lot of debt now is it? The average house where I live is about $140,000, but most of the people who buy them only make about 40,000 a year. That's not including their car loans, and other personal loans to include credit cards. Who's looking so upside down now, yet they all do just fine for the most part. You worry too much about things you haven't really though about. |
 The national debt is a real problem. Even (some parts of) the Government thinks so. The GAO is one such government agency. The Nation's Long-Term Fiscal Outlook: September 2006 Update
From : Fiscal Stewardship: A Critical Challenge Facing Our Nation Edited to fix first link. |
QFT |
The government doesn't make money? Are you out of your mind? You seriously think that the government doesn't put a lot of our tax dollars in stocks and other interest making accounts? They make so much money in interest that not only can they continue to make minimum payments on our debt, but are still able to give us a tax return each year! As long as we owe people money, they will leave us alone to continue to collect that money. There is no reason to pay it off fully. Keep in mind everyone pays taxes, so all of those government officials are pouring their money back into the government too. It's a price that anyone should be willing to pay to keep this country on top. All of these crooked officials actually know what they are doing. It's a proven fact. Every generation cries over the government, but the fact of the matter is, our great nation is doing fine, just like it always has, no matter who is in office. Noone has ever invaded my house to take anything from me anyway... |
People who get tax return get them because the pay the government TOO MUCH of their paycheck via withholding. If you adjusted your withholding down enough you would owe them money every year. |
Ok, I'll bite. Show me a viable third party. One with the same kind of national, state and local infrastructure the R's and D's have. Show me a third party with some support in Washington. Show me a third party that can attract a candidate that both moderate D's, moderate R's and the middle will vote for. Show me a third party candidate that will have some support from their peers in Congress. Show me a third party candidate that has the same money raising ability the D's and R's have. Show me a third party candidate who's running based on a party platform, and not based on their candidates personality. And no, I won't bother waiting for your response. I'm smart enough, and informed enough, to know such a third party doesn't exist. The closest we've come to it was Perot, and that was all about Perot, not about a third party. When Perot left, his party evaporated. |
Who's the stupid one? You think Ron Paul can force Congress to do away with taxes or cut spending to almost nothing while the libertarians control only the White House? That has the strong stench of looser all around it. But wait, I forgot with free pot for all, we can pretend he is our savior, right? According to your mindless diatribe, the Libertarian party is now the official "Hate Christians" party? That is good to know. Now I have even a better reason to not vote for Ron Paul. Are Jews next on your hit list? |
And on that note, change the thread title to "Ron Paul DEBUNKED" 
|
| A 3rd party might not be a bad idea. But voting for them on the federal level is a waste of your vote at this point. Before any 3rd party has any kind of chance, they're going to need to establish a strong record at the local and state level. That's where the change has to start. |
I disagree. FIRST the electoral college must change so that EACH state's electoral vote must be assigned to parties by the percentage of the state they win. No longer winner take all. This would allow 3rd and 4th powers prestige by making deals to electoral votes. Without this 3rd parties are toothless dogs only capable of loosing elections for either democrats or republicans(which ever one they associate with). After that change, THEN the parties will have to establish that strong record you're talking about. |
Winner takes all/ RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL makes the politicians more prone to make adult choices. Not all the time, of course, but one party rule does the right thing more often than the proportional coalition groups. |
Paulicites are always in full tinfoil meltdown mode. But it is nice when they expose themselves for the hateful nasty people many of them are. |
Then go ahead and create something. The problem is that why you are taking 20 years to build the party the Democrats will win every election because you have split the Conservative base away from the Republican Party. Just like what happen in 1992 that got us eight years of Bill Clinton. It is better to work within the Republican Party to change it than to give the Democrats power by default. No materr how bad the Republicans are (and they can be very bad at times) they are 1,000 times better than the Democrats. What we need to do is transform the Republican Party back into PaleoCons instead of allowing the NeoCons to take over. We need to get back to the basic conservative values and decrease government spending. We can't have our foreign policy be centered around the security of Israel so they can live well. We need to secure the borders. We need to reestablish Constitutional values instead of catering to the special interest group with the most money. The problem is not the Republican Party per se. It is the NeoCons that define modern Day Conservatism. |
We're also in one of our biggest wars ever. FYI The anniversary of it's start in in a few days. |
If that's the way you want to look at it, fine. But don't EVER expect to have a 3rd party. |
Here's three words for you "Republican Controlled Congress". Oh, wait, Not OK to blame Bush for everything, OK to blame Clinton for everything. Remember one of the definitions of an idiot. One who keeps doing the same thing expecting different results. |
Christ, are we gojng to have to put up with stuff like this until Nov. '08?
|
Its OK to keep voting Republican. Just don't expect to win many more elections until you go back to being conservative rather than RINO's. |
Good, you'll have plenty to complain about as Democrats win more elections. |
Yes! finally someone else understands. The neocons were Democrat 'War Hawks" that deserted the Dems when the "New Left" took them over. The only thing they have in common with true Republicans is a belief in a strong military. Otherwise, they are socialist. Hence the term 'Compassionate Conservative". We need a true old fashion conserative. Run Fred Run. |
You and your guys don't balance the budget any which way. Just borrow more, hey, someone else is going to have to pay it back, right? |
| I'm all for a new way......but let's face facts....Say a third party candidate is elected to POTUS, then what? Unless you replace a majority of congress with third party candidates, you have elected a lame duck president who would be incapable of doing anything. |
So according to you, every man, woman and child in the US makes $44,000 per year. And you've thought this through? |
No, he is using PUBLISHED FACT that if the GDP were divided among the population, each would receive $44,000 per year based on 2006 stats. Are you really that dumb? |
|
I suppose I agree with the OP point that neither party is doing a great job, but your money logic is flawed. Of course, the highest debts are racked up from the most recent policies. This years(name the product/expense) is the highest cost in human history! After all this years Honda Accord, under Bush, is The Most Expensive Honda Accord Ever...EVER. So what. |
VETO That checks and balances thing is a bitch. |
Ever hear of the Whig Party? They are the ones the Republicans bumped off the "choice number two" slot. |
They also won't sit around and do nothing. They are constantly passing little resolutions and laws. If the President keeps them stonewalled they will have to learn to give and take. |
The OP is arguing for a smaller government, that's Conservatism. Conservative and Liberal in the governmental sense means smaller and larger government involvement, respectively. The terms have nothing to do with morals or religion. That's neoconservatism. Governmental Liberalism is indeed a mental disorder, but it has nothing to do with anything the OP has been advocating. |
Very good, but I wasn't talking about him. He just reminds me of her. She is a hard core libtard and they seem to argue the same. |
|
9 Trillion dollars in debt is a lot of money to be indebt for. But that is ½ of the figure the United States Federal receipts or the amount of money they have coming in for 2006 was 2.2 Trillion dollars. The national Debt is to an equal to a person making $220,000.00 owing $900,000.00. You have to look at the income as well as the debt; you also have to look at the assets. The Gross Domestic Product of the United States was 13.21 Trillion dollars for 2006. You have to look at the whole picture not just one corner. |
Your logic is astounding. As if all those trillions are taxed as if they were ordinary income spread among every man woman and child. Brilliant. As if the debt were going to be repaid by corporations. Are you that naive? I think I already have a handle on how smart you are. |