The result of an "ownership society"
I think the current administration does not care about most Americans:
An October report from the U.S. Department of Agriculture found that 2004 was the fifth consecutive year in which the number of Americans in households at risk of hunger increased.
So instead of dealing with Americans (many of whom work at least one job) who are hungry, the USDA decided to stop calling them "hungry". We should change it to something that sounds more "compassionate" to match the Neo-Con rhetoric. So the Bush administration appointees came up with the new lable.
Now the USDA calls hungry people, “food-insecure”. American households, who remember are no longer hungry but "insecure about getting food" rose to 38.2 million last year,(2005) including 13.8 million children.
God bless the child whose got his own...
Meanwhile,
Barbara Bush has her purse snatched while being guarded by the SS...
Out-of-wedlock births in the United States have climbed to an all-time high, accounting for nearly four in 10 babies born last year, government health officials said. Clearly abstinence only programs are working well.
Kissenger claims there is no way for military victory to be achieved in Iraq (but we shoud stay for a few more years just to be sure)
almost 40 million people have AIDS
why are we spending trillions on death and killing?
posted by Mistake Master @ 10:54 PM
25 Comments:
So what's the answer bro?
Wait. My mind-read-o-tron is turned on... SPEND MONEY ON THEM.
Give these people enough money and all the problems go away right?
It's amazing that this world produces enough food to feed everyone on the planet twice for every meal everyday and the technology to get the food to everyone, but we would rather throw most of that food away (rather than giving it away) because of economics. That is why we are doomed.
Regarding the babies born out of wedlock, in all fairness, teen pregnancies have gone down while the number of unmarried couples and single women in their 20's having babies out of wedlock is going up. I take it to mean that more and more people are becoming less concerned about religious dogma. Some of the best parents with the best behaved kids are those who had children before getting married (I know 2 couples - great parents, good people, wonderful kids).
It's also amazing that people here in the good ole US would rather steal than get a job and feed their families.
So Thanh comes over from China, works 16 hours a day, saves his money, opens a computer store, pays taxes gives back to the community by hiring Americans.
But he votes Republican so he's the enemy.
The American Dream used to be about being successful. Now, according to the liberal mindset, it's about redistribution of wealth and whining when the election results don't go the way you want.
Nice, very nice.
Stew, the Republicans ARE the enemy! This Administration has reported record high tax revenues during a time when we are at war costing the country (the taxpayers, you know, you and me) $346,307,853,396 so far and counting. That's 346 billion dollars. Since taking office they have amassed over 5 trillion dollars (that's $5,000,000,000,000) of debt shattering all previous records, and they're not done yet.
The war has cost less than one-tenth of the amount of debt incurred above and beyond the record tax revenues. Where has all of that money gone? Who could possibly have that much money to loan us? Oh right, the Chinese. I just bet they'll want that money back someday. Sooner rather than later.
My G-d man! Do you have any idea what the interest is on that loan?!
Stew, I don't think that I have ever said "redistribution of wealth" since to do that would require wealth to begin with and I have none to redistribute, neither do you for that matter, or Doug or any of our contemporaries for that matter.
I would like to see tax dollars going where they will actually benefit people. Show me how depleted uranium, suicide bombings brought to you by some chemical company's (paid for with USA tax dollars) land mines and extrordaniry rendition actually help anyone. Please!
How are we able to take such action as a nation and not be seen as war mongers, killers and criminals. I think that applies to all the nations of the world though. America is not alone in this. Britian, France, China, all the nations of the world spend money on death. We just spend soooo much more.
Why not spend it on us is all I'm saying. It is taxes that are collected that funds what we are already doing. Clearly that is not working very well... ow bout a change of direction?
Stop blaming the liberals
sigh
"I don't think that I have ever said "redistribution of wealth" since to do that would require wealth to begin with and I have none to redistribute, neither do you for that matter, or Doug or any of our contemporaries for that matter."
Yes, you have. Your ignorance is inexcusable bro. And Douggie for that matter (hottie wife or not).
You see, redistribution of wealth occurs every single day. In the form of employer matching contributions. You don't see this because you don't own a business. Think about starting one, the last thing you'll consider is the thousands of dollars MONTHLY that go to the federal and state government in taxes. And you spout on about "Corporate Welfare".
You have no idea what you're talking about.
Stew,
I am not even going to pretend that you are sane at this point. The taxes that are already being collected and spent are the dollars that I am talking about. So say we cut taxes by 50%. Okay we would still have tax dollars to spend. Of those dollars I want the percentage spent on new gadgets to kill from afar and upkeep on our current stock of death bringers to be LESS than what we spen on the people of America. We I talk about corporate welfare, your small business doesn't fit that category. Not a dis on the business you run, just that you are not Exxon or Dow or Cargyle or Halliburton.
THAT is the corporate I refer to in "corporate welfare".
Do you think that you should not have to pay taxes at all?
People who don't want to pay taxes don't believe in America. I hear repubs talk about the tax and spend policy of the Democrats, yet they never talk about their own fiscal policy of cut taxes for the wealthy elite-borrow like there's no tomorrow-and-spend til the end.
BTW, Stew, you never answered my questions: where has all of our tax money gone? Record tax revenues with record borrowing, we should have enough to buy all of our ways into heaven. The war hasn't even cost 400 billion so far so where did the rest of our money go? And second, how much interest do you think we will spend on our 8.6 trillion dollar debt (5 trillion of which was borrowed by Dubya, and most of the rest by Reagan)? How does that fit in with your fiscally conservative viewpoint?
hehehe Well, you're right about that. I'm not sane.
You're disregarding the tenet. You're talking about the result of an ownership society. Then you claim that the government can take care of everyone if we'll just all pull together.
Bro, you're not thinking this through. It's the exact opposite.
You're talking about socialism.
Socialist societies are the worst offenders of human rights in history. Forget about healthcare in Cuba, you're just happy to get something to EAT.
Yet you blithely maintain that is better than capitalism.
I maintain that America is great BECAUSE of the capitalism. We, the American people, including deluded liberal tree huggers have an opportunity to care about other people because our needs are met. But then again, you have a job. You show up every day. You strive to improve.
Douggie, excellent point actually. Now ask yourself to define conservative and compare the recent crop of "conservative" politicians.
The election results showed us that Republicans forgot how to be conservative.
If I were to define conservative based on actions, and not the words they speak, I would have to say that conservative is the height of fiscal irresponsibility due to their handing out of tax cuts to the wealthiest during a time of record high borrowing and spending (regardless of how the money has been spent). Conservatives pride themselves on being patriotic, yet they don't think they should have to pay their share.
Next, conservative completely disregards the Constitution unless it can be used to further its own agenda. This was seen in the 2000 election when the party of states' rights used the Supreme Court to bully out Al Gore from the race, who incidentally won both the popular vote and the electoral college once the votes were all counted; the complete disregard of existing laws to wiretap millions of Americans phone calls and emails and the subsequent changing of the law to get around the illegality of what they had already done; the legalization of torture as an interrogation technique of detainees who have already been denied their right to due process/habeas corpus.
Conservative has no sense of ethics. This has been repeatedly demonstrated by the lack of testimony provided under oath during Senate hearings and other investigations. It has also been seen in the Foley scandal, where several prominent conservatives participated in the cover up (the sweeping under the rug so-to-speak) of Foley's follies rather than making him quietly get help before the media hears about it and the Democrats get blamed.
You say that the repubs forgot how to be conservative and yet you still vehemently support them. It isn't just Bush who "forgot how to be conservative," but also his daddy and Reagan, possibly Nixon, too.
Actions or words, which speak louder to you.
I like puppies ;)
Stew I am looking at the results of Bush's policies. You are not benefiting from them are you? I fail to see how anyone can look at America and based on the number of personal bankruptcies, poverty level, "food insecurity" and wage growth and say that Bush and his policies have made most Americans better off.
You speak with certain knowledge of Cuba but you have never been there. How many Cubans do you hang out with?
You are trapped by your ideology and even though it is contrary to your interests you cling to it.
I am just saying that I think America would be a way better place (for puppies) if we took care of each other and didn't spend so much money on death. We could have more water theme parks...
Douggie, you probably should have just stopped after the first paragraph. But since you didn't... "The Rich" as defined by you libs pay way WAY more than our fair share. You work for a rich person. Take that person away and you have no job am I correct.
That'll take about a decade to sink in so I'll move on ignoring the rest of the drivel.
Bro, spot check your brain at the blog again?
Unemployment is at it's lowest point since the 50's. I'd say that's good.
Fewer people are below the poverty line (also good).
In spite of the "millions of jobs going overseas" there is still a strong employment environment today (also good).
And I know a couple of Cuban expats. I actually have a very good friend that is a Cuban. She's here legally by the way. Take a little while and read some Cuban American blogs. They'll illustrate how wonderful the "worker's paradise" works out in Cuba.
I'm more than willing to change my mind when I'm incorrect.
I'm not when it comes to the economy and the travesty of socialism.
And look at the bright side, we can agree on something finally!
Stop Doug from eating puppies!!!
You Said: "Fewer people are below the poverty line (also good)."
What!!??
Even though there was a %1.1 increase in 04-05 on average that doesn't translate into your warm fuzzy picture.
Stew
-America's Second Harvest (http://www.secondharvest.org/), the nation's largest network of food banks, reports that 23.3 million people turned to the agencies they serve in 2001, an increase of over 2 million since 1997. Forty percent were from working families.
That was back in 2001 and it has NOT gotten all that much better since then. Well okay according to the census and (W's) statisticians it has gotten one.one percent better, For whites. While the poverty level remained unchanged. Oh! But there were fewer people with health insurance so that balances it out.
Real median income of households rose in the Northeast (2.9 percent) and in the West (1.5 percent) . Income remained statistically unchanged for the South and Midwest.
You are not correct in the essence of what you are trying to portray. Which is a picture of America with a healthy economy benefiting all workers. It isn't happening like this though.
A lot of these people in poverty, are not lazy, shiftless criminals. They are working.
Why in America is it right to have a family with both parents woking full time and still living in poverty? Or "food insecure" ?
Besides, if you are one of the rich then why the hell have you not given me a birthday present for the last ten years?
So you crush my anecdotal evidence and then agree with me. But after qualifying it with "Bush's facts". Ha! I know that I'm not going to change your mind. I just hope that you're smart enough to realize that you're doing exactly what you accuse me and every other conservative of, that being that you choose to interpret facts as YOU see them. Whatever. I live in a world that you don't. I employ people. People rely on me for their food, their shelter, their clothing.
If you ever grow balls enough to walk that line then you'll have an opportunity to criticize me. Till then, you're a lemming. Working for the man.
Oh and I haven't bought you a birthday present because I am a selfish bastard and I didn't remember. And I'm sorry. I'm going to make it up to you though. You'll see.
I love you bro.
"Douggie, you probably should have just stopped after the first paragraph. But since you didn't... "The Rich" as defined by you libs pay way WAY more than our fair share. You work for a rich person. Take that person away and you have no job am I correct."
No, you are not correct. There are many things I can do in my field on my own and have the contacts to do them. Without my boss, a registered, licensed architect, I can not get licensed myself. Which isn't to say that I don't love where I work, because I do. The nice thing about architecture and construction is that there will always be a need boss or no boss. My goal, as most other aspiring architects is to have my own design firm (design-build in my case). However, that takes an extra-ordinarily long time in this industry, to be successful anyway. But that's another conversation...
I like how you skipped over the part about conservative policies equaling the height of fiscal irresponsibility due to their handing out of tax cuts to the wealthiest during a time of record high borrowing and spending. Something many other conservatives skip over (got my uncle to admit it this weekend in Vegas). Conservatives call Democrats the "Tax & Spend Party," yet their own actions say that Republicans are the, "Borrow-like-there's-no-tomorrow & Spend-till-the-end Party."
He! He! I love being right! Er.. correct!
THIS is what I'm talking about...
Goldman Sachs on Tuesday closed the books on the most profitable year ever for a Wall Street investment bank, nearly doubling fourth-quarter earnings on the strength of big trading gains, lucrative investments in Asia and a reduction in compensation expense.
See Stu, This is Bush's constituency. Not you or me or Doug... Did you double fourth quarter earnings? Did you "reduce compensation expenses?" or do you still have to pay taxes and other compensation related expenses as a business owner?
How is it that you still suport these policies that are not working for you?
Douggie, your boss is the reason you have your job.
When you speak of fiscal irresponsibility you're hitting the nail on the head. Witness the last election. Republicans are lacking the ability to be conservative. There's very little difference between them and Demorats imo.
Bro, you see Goldman Sachs as an enemy because they're successful. I see them as an inspiration.
I don't see them as the enemy though. I see them as an indicator of our economy. What inspiration you may get from them only shows that, an elite minority holding massive wealth and control over political and social structures through their economic sway, is admirable to you.
Am I wrong?
If so then how can you not see them as the indication that the "growth" in the American economy has been focused on a very small section of the overall economic base, while they have made record profits most working Americans have not gotten anywhere. Except further in debit.
I don't think GS is the enemy, I think the system that panders to them is contrary to the good will and mutual well being of Americans.
Well we're finally getting down to it then.
The reason that they are making gobs of cash is because THEY ARE TRYING to make gobs of cash.
See bro, the hoi polloi DON'T try to make gobs of cash.
See?
I gagged you. I mean tagged you.
(Reuters) - President George W. Bush said on Wednesday that he supports a Democratic proposal to increase the U.S. minimum wage but said it should be coupled with tax and regulatory relief for small businesses.
"I believe we should do it in a way that does not punish the millions of small businesses that are creating most of the new jobs in our country," Bush told a news conference. "So, I support pairing it with targeted tax and regulatory relief to help these small businesses stay competitive and to help keep our economy growing."
Now will you just SHUT UP about how raising the minimum wage will banjrupt small businesses? Even Bush understands that trickle down economics do not work for anyone except those at the top.
Nope. Because Bush is wrong to support an increase in the minimum wage. And I'm pretty certain that we small business owners will not see a tax break of any form. Especially with the tax and spend Demorats taking orifice.
You've opined loudly about how Bush is a fascist, right? I seem to remember it.
Do you consider the minimum wage to be a fascist ideal?
(and Merry Christmas!)
Stew,
First let me say that I love you. Your strength and hilarious spirit of silly adventure have made growing up as your brother a wonderful experience.
Now to answer you.
No I don't think raising the minimum wage is a facist ideology. But, let me point out that it wasn't Bush's idea! It was just another weasle move (since we can't call him a liar) from someone who sez thangs like "bring it on" and "You're doing a heckuva job Brownie" which clearly mean nothing. You can't really expect anything of substance just because he responds to a question. He had also just taken "a thumpin" and was eager to act civil.
So I still think Bush is a facist. I still think he is a war monger/profiteer and I still think he just wanted to go to war and there was no stopping him. For one rare point of time the war mongers had their man in place with a total majority (however thin or credible)and they were going to mess shit up!
So to conclude, I think that you are wrong to acknowledge that the party you support has done nothing for you as a professional. Furthermore your chosen party creates an environment where you are forced to support policies that work against your interest.
Bush may defer your taxes, since you can not claim that the taxes were truly cut. In order to actually cut taxes you also have to cut spending. I thought America knew that the Republicans can't cut spending even though the claim to. I thought Americans knew that when the Republicans say "we cut your taxes" it meant, "We have deferred the actual tax burden to some time faaaar away when we're sure you'll be doing swell and can pay it, along with the interest."
"We'll also be giving the real tax cuts to the ones who need it least. Oil companies and military contractors"
So why exactly are we giving tax breaks to Texaco, Exxon etc...?
Seriously? How is it that a sector of our economy which holds a monopoly gets a bunch of money from the government? The make like 789,000.00 a minute.
Check my math.
Brudder, I'd like you to seriously consider this: google "economic fascism"
Your thoughts?
Post a Comment
<< Home