The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: CC27 on August 12, 2011, 08:48:23 PM
-
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri Aug-12-11 04:35 PM
Original message
Can the Democratic Party survive without taxes??
True liberals might argue that the average life span of Americans has been increased to some degree by the advent of social programs to help the poor and needy.
Where would our elderly be without Social Security and Medicare? We didn't always have them. We didn't always have unemployment insurance if you lost your job. We didn't always have the minimum wage - people would work for whatever they could make. Times were hard scrabble.
All these programs were paid for with taxes on the American people. We can debate whether or not we would have been better off without these taxes but those that live in reality would have to argue for the benefit of higher taxes.
If taxes are cut, if Medicare is cut, if Social Security is diminished, if Medicaid is done away with, we will be less of a country, in my opinion.
If there are no taxes, there is little need for a Democratic Party. Whether we like to admit it or not, more taxes are necessary for the survival of the Democratic Party. Democrats should not be ashamed or fearful of asking for higher taxes on the wealthy. That is the basic reason for the existence of both Parties. Republicans do not wish to share the wealth and Democrats do. When we cease to do that, we may as well fold our hand and go home.
That last paragraph made my head spin like linda blair.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1727558
-
If taxes are cut, if Medicare is cut, if Social Security is diminished, if Medicaid is done away with, we will be less of a country, in my opinion.
IMO it would force people to make better choices in their life. If you knew welfare wasn't available people would make a choice not to get pregnant, if housing wasn't available families would have to step in and take care of their own, if food stamps weren't available families or Churches would step in, if SS wasn't available people would have to make choices as far as their retirement goes wouldn't they? Like many Republicans, I have no problem with a lot of these programs helping people out temporarily if they're going through a hard time, but to make services like this a mandate is insane, it allows people to not take responsibility for themselves.
-
The problem is the democrat party doesn't want to share their own wealth, they want to share everyone else's.
-
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri Aug-12-11 04:35 PM
Original message
Can the Democratic Party survive without taxes??
True liberals might argue that the average life span of Americans has been increased to some degree by the advent of social programs to help the poor and needy.
Where would our elderly be without Social Security and Medicare? We didn't always have them. We didn't always have unemployment insurance if you lost your job. We didn't always have the minimum wage - people would work for whatever they could make. Times were hard scrabble.
All these programs were paid for with taxes on the American people. We can debate whether or not we would have been better off without these taxes but those that live in reality would have to argue for the benefit of higher taxes.
If taxes are cut, if Medicare is cut, if Social Security is diminished, if Medicaid is done away with, we will be less of a country, in my opinion.
If there are no taxes, there is little need for a Democratic Party. Whether we like to admit it or not, more taxes are necessary for the survival of the Democratic Party. Democrats should not be ashamed or fearful of asking for higher taxes on the wealthy. That is the basic reason for the existence of both Parties. Republicans do not wish to share the wealth and Democrats do. When we cease to do that, we may as well fold our hand and go home.
I haven't done this myself, but I would imagine that if you were to run kentuck's post through the moonbat to English translator it would come out as: How will those of us who are too lazy to work get by if more money is not stolen from working people?
-
I haven't done this myself, but I would imagine that if you were to run kentuck's post through the moonbat to English translator it would come out as: How will those of us who are too lazy to work get by if more money is not stolen from working people?
I thought he was on the verge of a revelation, and finally coming to see that the DemonRat party has nothing to offer except bribes for votes.
-
The problem is the democrat party doesn't want to share their own wealth, they want to share everyone else's.
Freeper hits it. H5.
-
"YES WE CAN", ain't that what the HNIC said?
-
I'll at least give kudos to the bluegrass primitive in that he admits the purpose of the Dem party is gain power by taking possessions via force of gov't from one group and giving it to another. What the Dems want to do has nothing to do with what the Founding Fathers envisioned when they conceived a country built upon freedom, liberty, and justice, but it is their MO. Should they ever get their way, it'll be the USA in name only.
.
-
Thanks for the fodder, kentuck.
Nice to see you being honest for a change.
Has to be the most revealing thread out there. :lmao:
-
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri Aug-12-11 04:35 PM
Original message
Can the Democratic Party survive without taxes??
Blahblahblah.
Actually, 'taxes' is a dogwhistle for the use of runaway entitlement payouts to buy votes for the Democrats, so obviously the answer is no, the Democrat Party can't survive on its merits (Lacking any of those anyway), but much continue to buy votes with ever-expanding entitlement programs to stay afloat.
It's all in the script, anyone can do this.
[I hate that dogwhistle crap when they do it, hopefully one or two of the lurking Dems will see from this what a stretch it is to attribute everything on the other side's agenda to code words for ill intent.]
-
Actually, 'taxes' is a dogwhistle for the use of runaway entitlement payouts to buy votes for the Democrats, so obviously the answer is no, the Democrat Party can't survive on its merits (Lacking any of those anyway), but much continue to buy votes with ever-expanding entitlement programs to stay afloat.
It's all in the script, anyone can do this.
[I hate that dogwhistle crap when they do it, hopefully one or two of the lurking Dems will see from this what a stretch it is to attribute everything on the other side's agenda to code words for ill intent.]
DUmbasses can't hear a dog-whistle.
Their heads are so far power slammed up there ass, they can't hear freakin' shit.
Pardon my freakin' French.
-
DUmbasses can't hear a dog-whistle.
Their heads are so far power slammed up there ass, they can't hear freakin' shit.
Pardon my freakin' French.
Yo, has Vinnie been teachin' you how to talk good or what? Sounds like you read one too many of the DUde's threads, he's freakin' rubbin' off on youse.
-
Yo, has Vinnie been teachin' you how to talk good or what? Sounds like you read one too many of the DUde's threads, he's freakin' rubbin' off on youse.
One of these days. To the moon Alice.
I hope you ain't in Texas, cause it might get expensive.
-
Uh oh.
The bluegrass primitive committed one of those nadisms.
hard scrabble
What is it about some primitives, that they have to break single words into two?
-
Uh oh.
The bluegrass primitive committed one of those nadisms.
hard scrabble
What is it about some primitives, that they have to break single words into two?
He sure as hell did that.
I haven't hit the island after I last posted.
Can only take so much.
-
Actually, 'taxes' is a dogwhistle for the use of runaway entitlement payouts to buy votes for the Democrats, so obviously the answer is no, the Democrat Party can't survive on its merits (Lacking any of those anyway), but much continue to buy votes with ever-expanding entitlement programs to stay afloat.
It's all in the script, anyone can do this.
[I hate that dogwhistle crap when they do it, hopefully one or two of the lurking Dems will see from this what a stretch it is to attribute everything on the other side's agenda to code words for ill intent.]
H5 for two Nadinisms in the same line.
-
If there are no taxes, there is little need for a Democratic Party. Whether we like to admit it or not, more taxes are necessary for the survival of the Democratic Party. Democrats should not be ashamed or fearful of asking for higher taxes on the wealthy. That is the basic reason for the existence of both Parties. Republicans do not wish to share the wealth and Democrats do. When we cease to do that, we may as well fold our hand and go home.
This is post that stands alone worthy. This pretty much sums up the DU perfectly.