[Nesster]

Oh pleeeez, like the conservatives invented and own the idea that work and responsibility for self is good. Got news for you: plenty of liberals believe in work and self-responsibility. We just believe that we ought to help out those less fortunate than us as well, and tend to be realists about what actually happens in the real world. Unlike conservatives who live in an ideologically perfect world, curse the less fortunate for crimping their style and for not having a moral backbone, and throw tantrums when it inevitably turns out the world doesn't work the way they imagine it should.

[Parallax]

..............We just believe that we ought to help out those less fortunate than us as well, .............

Nesster, I believe that too.
The difference is that as a conservative I believe that my hand should be the only one reaching into my pocket to get the money to do it.
As a conservative I believe that I should be the one to decide who, when, and how much I help out.

[Nesster]

Nesster, I believe that too.
The difference is that as a conservative I believe that my hand should be the only one reaching into my pocket to get the money to do it.
As a conservative I believe that I should be the one to decide who, when, and how much I help out.

But it gets so tiresome evaluating who, when, and how much to help out all the time, isn't it simpler to let Uncle Sam do it for you Besides which, you might forget to help out some people who really really need your help. I know I would. By deciding once, to elect the right crew, you know all this will be taken care for you.

[GeneV]

And then there are some others of us who just think that Uncle Sam isn't always the greediest or most dangerous hand shoving its way into our pocket--sometimes he is keeping that hand out of our pockets.

[Parallax]

And then there are some others of us who just think that Uncle Sam isn't always the greediest or most dangerous hand shoving its way into our pocket--sometimes he is keeping that hand out of our pockets.

Well, he was until deregulation, and now that SCOTUS has removed the dollar limit on bribes to candidates, Uncle Sam may actually be able to take top honors.

[Rupert]

Yeah, I figure I'm going to pay for that.

Nah, not today, I'm in a really great mood....the thermometer just hit 90F for the first time this year, my Dolly was a lunchtime joy...as usual, and the world looks pretty good right now!

I will add that the tax paid on that bonanza was enormous....more than I would have normally made in a year, but I am not complaining. There are plenty of wasted causes it will go for, but there are also some very worthwhile ones too. Not every person receiving Govt help is a deadbeat, although some would have us believe that. I never see the right concerned for those less fortunate, like the poor guy with Parkinsons that they were taunting to "get a job" and throwing cash at. I see programs that have helped the vast majority of Americans and only hear the right tell us we need to eliminate them......Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid...now Obamacare. If you are not rich and on the right, you are on a string for the Fat Cats, there is just no way around it. I'm no turtle up on a post, I've had lots of help in my life and am thankful for it........the least I can do is to try and see that others get a level playing field and a little help when they are down. Democrats think that way....Republicans do not....plain and simple.
Best Regards

[Nesster]

Wait a minute, corporate giving to candidates is a hand in your pocket how? I thought that was good free market stuff: anyone should be able to give as much money to anyone they damn please.

A good Republican would take a look at the situation and decide to become a candidate, so the corporate fingers would line his pockets too.

[Artesian]

Well, he was until deregulation, and now that SCOTUS has removed the dollar limit on bribes to candidates, Uncle Sam may actually be able to take top honors.

As of late with all the takeovers, we are looking at our pockets being ripped from our pants and there will be no more pockets. We really will not need them anyway because we will have nothing to put in them.
A

[GeneV]

Wait a minute, corporate giving to candidates is a hand in your pocket how? I thought that was good free market stuff: anyone should be able to give as much money to anyone they damn please.

A good Republican would take a look at the situation and decide to become a candidate, so the corporate fingers would line his pockets too.

I had to read that twice, but I think he is saying that corporations will now be able to take more from our pockets, since they will own the goverment through their donations.

[Nesster]

That's how I read it too, but that would be a liberal's worry... after all the Supremes went extreme activist conservative for the decision, indeed asking for expanded grounds for the arguments in order to do so. But no worry, for the next logical step is for corporations to get voting rights... then proportional voting rights based on the number of employees....

[Parallax]

I had to read that twice, but I think he is saying that corporations will now be able to take more from our pockets, since they will own the government through their donations.

You got the brass ring, Gene.

............ But no worry, for the next logical step is for corporations to get voting rights... then proportional voting rights based on the number of employees....

Please don't put ideas like that in the politicians' heads.

[Nesster]

Unfortunately it's not the politicians, it's the activist conservatives on the Court who are doing this.

[Artesian]

Unfortunately it's not the politicians, it's the activist conservatives on the Court who are doing this.

The politicians just lick their lips at lobby money. More to spend to keep their jobs.
A

[yucatanPentax]

“Absolutely, precisely,” Mr. Greenspan replied. “You know, that’s precisely the reason I was shocked, because I have been going for 40 years or more with very considerable evidence that it was working exceptionally well but in fact it was self destructing.”

If even Greenspan says the Free Market worship is out of hand, then it is time to really pay attention. Greenspan has been an Ayn Rand-idolizing full blast free marketer for all his professional existence. All that selfish ideology wrapped up as pseudo-economic 'management' totally failed him.

Doesn't that tell people something?

The Chicago School of Economics rise in influence is directly corelatable to the decline of the strength of American industry. "De-regulate, outsource, make a buck, free market rules."

This last collapse of the financial system was the full-on proof that the Chicago School view is dead wrong.

But the religion of "Free Market" is out there and no one has a stake big enough to put through its heart.

---------- Post added 03-31-2010 at 04:22 PM ----------

Nesster, I believe that too.
The difference is that as a conservative I believe that my hand should be the only one reaching into my pocket to get the money to do it.
As a conservative I believe that I should be the one to decide who, when, and how much I help out.

The difficulty with that philosophy is that a whole lot of people fall through the cracks. When charity or care for the poor or sick or whatever depends on appeals to private conscience, then the winners are those who look most sympathetic on TV and the losers are the ugly, or the unattractive or the less appealing people who are in equally desperate straits: poor, ill, homeless, disabled, orphaned, etc.

A society that only helps the sympathetic folks and lets the rest go, really isn't a civilized society in my book.

And that is the precise reason for a final safety net at the bottom. We are all debased by the suffering around us. We all should insure that people have a minimal survival chance, here in "the richest country in the world."

(oops, that's China now).

How about most powerful? nope, China too.
How about.... nope. Those days are passed.

[jeffkrol]

If even Greenspan says the Free Market worship is out of hand, then it is time to really pay attention. Greenspan has been an Ayn Rand-idolizing full blast free marketer for all his professional existence. All that selfish ideology wrapped up as pseudo-economic 'management' totally failed him.

Doesn't that tell people something?

The Chicago School of Economics rise in influence is directly corelatable to the decline of the strength of American industry. "De-regulate, outsource, make a buck, free market rules."

This last collapse of the financial system was the full-on proof that the Chicago School view is dead wrong.

But the religion of "Free Market" is out there and no one has a stake big enough to put through its heart.

---------- Post added 03-31-2010 at 04:22 PM ----------



The difficulty with that philosophy is that a whole lot of people fall through the cracks. When charity or care for the poor or sick or whatever depends on appeals to private conscience, then the winners are those who look most sympathetic on TV and the losers are the ugly, or the unattractive or the less appealing people who are in equally desperate straits: poor, ill, homeless, disabled, orphaned, etc.

A society that only helps the sympathetic folks and lets the rest go, really isn't a civilized society in my book.

And that is the precise reason for a final safety net at the bottom. We are all debased by the suffering around us. We all should insure that people have a minimal survival chance, here in "the richest country in the world."

(oops, that's China now).

How about most powerful? nope, China too.
How about.... nope. Those days are passed.

No.. no ...no... not logic, evidence and history AGAIN.... haven't you learned that's just not the way things are really... trust me.......... I KNOW better... see I got me a piece............