[QUOTE="links136"]

While thats true the other option is to be like mexico. I mean they do have some of the richest people in the world, and it sure is working out well for them right?

right?!?!?

airshocker

I have no idea what you are talking about. Go donate your pay-checks to someone on welfare.

I'll keep mine and take care of my family.

simple, mexico lacks any socialism and thus have an extreme parity between rich and poor. Mexico has some of the richest people in the world, but they have a way way bigger problem with poverty that America doesn't have thanks to socialism, which keeps the middle class strong. Its that simple. No socialism America = mexico. Do you want to be like Mexico? Its no surprise the highest HDI countries in the world are also the most socialist.

[QUOTE="PannicAtack"]

Yes. There's something wrong with believing in freedom and compassion. I'll go follow Ayn Rand instead.

airshocker

I believe in freedom and compassion as well. I also believe you have to work hard. Liberals tend to advocate giving other people's hard-earned money away to people who don't deserve it.

While thats true the other option is to be like mexico. I mean they do have some of the richest people in the world, and it sure is working out well for them right?

right?!?!?

[QUOTE="hamstergeddon"][QUOTE="airshocker"]

Bad choice of words on my part. No one successfully attacked America under Bush's leadership after 9/11. Not on the scale of of it, at least.

I don't see how appointing a director of Homeland Security, who had no idea that kidnapping by Mexican cartels was so prevalent in Phoenix, AZ, can be a good thing for the defense of this country.

I /also don't see how publicizing the methods the CIA uses to torture suspects can be a good thing, but I digress.

mephie25

theres alot of proof that bush ignored evidence of an attack such as this

[QUOTE="HomicidalCherry"]

The government spending too much does not drive an economy into the ground. After the recession, interest rates will have to go up to combat inflation and, yes, taxes will have to be raised, but the levels they were at pre-Obama were unsustainable in the first place. The government will never be able to consistently post surpluses with taxes as low as they were during the Bush Administration. In general, your post is overly-simplistic and assumes much about when and how Obama will pay off the deficits he is posting.

(as a side-note, it's amazing how the deficit hawks come out of the woodwork during Obama Administration, but never said a peep about the record deficits every president since Reagan (besides Clinton, he got lucky and was president during a big bubble) has been posting).

airshocker

Everyone criticized Bush on spending too much. I would much rather a trillion dollars be spent on national defense than healthcare change.

I never stated that Bush didn't spend too much. I do realize that these tax cuts did a lot of harm. Unfortunately, it's not one person's fault. Spending needs to stop in order for our economy to recover. Taxing will not make it better when people are already strapped for cash. Simplistic, yes. False? No.

and now you know why 911 happened seriously.

[QUOTE="PannicAtack"]How about getting into a pointless war? How about a shoddy foreign policy that didn't help us accomplish any goals? How about making America a laughingstock in the world?airshocker

You can think it's pointless. I think bringing democracy to the middle-east and removing a sadistic dictator was very worth fighting for. Not to mention killing off al-Qaeda by any means necessary.

Elaborate more on this 'shoddy' foreign policy. I didn't know we had any goals.

We're the laughingstock because we're spending trillions of dollars on a health care change that has been proven not to work. No one wanted to mess with us when G-Dubbya was president. Notice how we didn't get attacked again until Obama took office?

It pains me that people think no one attacked america during bush(911, anthrax etc) but the failed(noticed that there was no actual attack) underwear attack from a plane from amsterdam automatically makes obama the antichrist and bush god.

Even worse that someone is extremely happy for an illegal trillion dollar war based on nothing but fixing healthcare for the citizens OH NOEZ TEH HORROR HOW COULD YOU DO SUCH A THING!?!?!?!?!

What is going to make or break liberal vs conservative presidents is the economy.

When it tanks, which it will, liberalism and fiscal irresponsibility will be destroyed. Now I'm not saying Bush was the most fiscally-responsible leader, but it's pretty clear Obama is running our economy into the ground with legislation he has no means of paying for except by taxing the ever-living crud out of us. Higher taxes lead to less economic-stimulation and will ultimately cripple small-businesses that give us the jobs we so very need.

Hopefully this doesn't happen in our or our children's life-times.

airshocker

I think it's going to add one more problem for law enforcement.

I can see it now: DWB! Driving While Baked. People are going to get in their cars stoned, cause accidents and generally wreak havoc wherever marijuana is legalized.

Our country already has enough trouble cracking down on drunk driving.

I value human life much more than I do extra tax revenues.

airshocker

how exactly is keeping it illegal supposed to stop people from driving high? And how exactly is driving high any more dangerous then say women driving.

No. Parents should take responsibility and actually act like parents. Or if the teen (assuming we're talking about teens) is mature enough they should get their own.

binpink

like that'll ever happen

[QUOTE="Ultimas_Blade"][QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

Ignorant? No. I think the system has problems, but the idea of universal coverage provided by the government to be the wrong way to fix it. Why should I care more if a fellow American dies than any other human being dies? Aren't both instance equally terrible? Point aside, I have no problem with donating a fair portion of my money to those in need. (after I graduate from Uni :P) I just don't see a government takeover of the industry as the ultimate solution to the problem. I certainly think that some legislation with reforming insurance company policies, (pre-existing conditions) tort laws, and other unfavorable practices could, and should be enacted.

Furthermore, the middle-class can easily afford health insurance. Many just choose to not buy it. Others are illegal immigrants and cannot legally be covered. (although unlike most conservatives, I think it's rather unfair that they're being barred from insurance even if they're willing to pay...) The lower class has Medicaid. Perhaps the line for qualifying for Medicaid may need to move up some, but that's an easy fix.

coolbeans90

Last I recall, the insurance companies pull in a 3.3% profit margin. I never compared the body to a "car," please do not insinuate that I did. I agree that if someone is sick, they should be healed. How should the process work? I think that it shouldn't be run by a government beauracracy. Who should pay for it? ( or the premiums) In theory, the one recieving the service.

My parents combined made somewhere in between the amount of monies you listed, but they were always able to afford insurance, and some family members with serious health issues. It's also worth noting that I have a large number of siblings. Problem is, most people skew their priorities. Video games and fast food are fun and all, but people need to take care of their bodies first. It is undoubtedly a problem with the American culture in some regards. Long story short, the middle class CAN afford health insurance. Perhaps the government should give people a nudge to prioritize. Perhaps we should find ways to lower premiums via tort reform.

I trust private corporations more than I do the Federal Government. At least I know what to expect with the insurance companies. That can be modified via legislation.

Long story short, we "Republicans" (I hate associating myself with a political party) aren't baby-eating monsters. We just think that there are other solutions to the problems.

Congratz on the newborn :D

This makes me sick.

I know the government can be hard to trust, but let me tell you without the government, private corporations 10 out of 10 times would kill you if it meant more profit. They'd slaughter whole environments if it meant bigger profits as is evident by every FREAKIN UNREGULATED COUNTRY IN THE WORLD. No more is it evident than health insurance companies that will deny patients life saving surgeries because they would cost them to much and mean lower profits.