Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,816 Year: 3,073/9,624 Month: 918/1,588 Week: 101/223 Day: 12/17 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   How Does Republican Platform Help Middle Class?
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 801 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 121 of 440 (610616)
03-31-2011 3:42 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by Taq
03-31-2011 3:06 PM


You did. Your OP, imo, was very well worded so as to not get into a heated debate. It's just that someone decided to start getting defensive with their first post...... for absolutely no reason.

"What can be asserted without proof, can be dismissed without proof."-Hitch.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by Taq, posted 03-31-2011 3:06 PM Taq has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 122 of 440 (610617)
03-31-2011 3:43 PM
Reply to: Message 119 by New Cat's Eye
03-31-2011 3:20 PM


I think the most honest answer, from me, to your questions of how the Republicans help the middle class, is by keeping the other guys from hurting us.
The boogieman argument in its most basic form.
So who are "the other guys"? "Death Panels"? "Communists"? The people who "hate America" and "want the terrorists to win"? The Evil "Stealth Muslim" in the White House? Who specifically is trying to hurt you?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-31-2011 3:20 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 127 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-31-2011 5:19 PM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


Message 123 of 440 (610618)
03-31-2011 3:43 PM
Reply to: Message 116 by fearandloathing
03-31-2011 3:05 PM


Re: Waaaaaaaaaa!
I am self-employed, somewhat, and I cant afford insurance either. Health care is one of the main reasons I have parted with most of my republican shortcomings. I have done ok in years past and I am sad to say that I used to have similar feelings as phage, I was wrong. Now I struggle just to get by. I let a car get repossessed becuase I can no longer afford it. I am only a short step from needing a little help myself and can see the need for many social programs now more then ever.
I've been there. Spent over a year on unemployment once. I was pretty conservative in my youth as well - to my great shame, I supported people and policies that I would today find utterly disgusting.
The simple fact is that most people won;t even see an ethical problem until it's pointed out to them - and sometimes that means experiencing a hardship for yourself. Stories of "welfare queens" and other myths easily let people view the downtrodden as "leaches" on society. Popular books like Atlas Shrugged reinforce those beliefs. Since this allows people to continue on guilt-free without changing their minds, they do so. Only when you present a person with actual facts (and there will still be resistance, people are not rational by nature and don;t change their minds easily) will you get them to even notice that there's a problem with their beliefs.
And then there are still a few sociopaths like Phage, who couldn't give a shit less about anyone else as long as they feel like they have theirs.
I guess the republicans would have me sell my home and live off that money, then go to homeless shelter. I see no glimmer of hope for anyone in the middle class from anything the republicans offer.
Conservative fiscal policy has several glaring holes.
1) It's not based on fact, it's based on emotional principles on what a person "deserves" and reactionary opposition to hints of "communism." They aren;t really concerned with actual per-capita costs, or they'd embrace universal healthcare with a single-payer plan like the Second Coming. They donl;t want any of their hard-earned money (or hard-inherited, or hard-invested, or whatever) being taxed to support some other guy, because that's "theft."
2) It completely ignores the fact that letting people sink-or-swim causes a larger drain on society in the long run than helping to keep effective producers working. If a middle-class person loses their home, loses their car, etc, he can no longer effectively contribute to society. If we help him by publicly funding healthcare, helping to cover gaps in employment when layoffs happen, etc, we can lose less int eh long run as that individual can continue to contribute to the whole. The easier we make it to bounce back to "normal" employment, the smaller we make the "fall" when bad things like recessions or illnesses happen, the less we'll need to invest in the long run.
3) It completely ignores morality, substituting ethics with obsessive greed, plain and simple. I earned my money, you can;t have any of it. The animated TV comedy Metalocalypse features a band that sometimes manages to make effective satire, and here are some of the lyrics to one of their songs, which I think sums up the Republican fiscal policy perfectly:
quote:
I want to keep my money
And give away absolutely nothing
To the government who moderates my spending
and obliterates depending on what time of the year
brutality is near
in the form of income tax
I'd rather take a fucking axe
to my face, blow up this place
with you all in it, I'd do it in a minute
If I could write off your murder
I'd save all of my receipts
because I'd rather you be dead
than lose a tiny shred of what I made this fiscal year
I'd rather you be dead than ponder parting with my second home
I'd rather you be dead than consider not opening a restaurant
I'd rather you be dead



This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by fearandloathing, posted 03-31-2011 3:05 PM fearandloathing has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 125 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-31-2011 4:48 PM Rahvin has not replied

  
fearandloathing
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 990
From: Burlington, NC, USA
Joined: 02-24-2011


Message 124 of 440 (610621)
03-31-2011 4:04 PM


Her is a pointless comment.
I know I could never be a good republican becuase I felt worse for my helper when I told him my biggest contractor wouldn't be building no more new homes for a while, all we had left was to finish a few we had started. If he can find something else then he should. At least he could draw unemployment was all I could think. I felt like I was letting a man down who had been with me for 4 years.

"I hate to advocate the use of drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they always worked for me." - Hunter S. Thompson

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 125 of 440 (610631)
03-31-2011 4:48 PM
Reply to: Message 123 by Rahvin
03-31-2011 3:43 PM


Re: Waaaaaaaaaa!
They aren;t really concerned with actual per-capita costs ...
Or tax rates, either.
They would rather pay a large sum of money called a premium than a smaller sum of money called a tax; and this is weird enough.
But weirder still, they would rather pay a large amount of tax and call the result "capitalism" than pay a smaller amount of tax and call the result "socialism".
Of course, this is only weird if you suppose that they've actually looked at the figures and thought it through. If instead you suppose that they are ignorant of the facts and are just knee-jerking to buzzwords and propaganda, then the situation is not weird at all --- it's depressingly commonplace.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by Rahvin, posted 03-31-2011 3:43 PM Rahvin has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 126 of 440 (610636)
03-31-2011 5:17 PM
Reply to: Message 120 by Taq
03-31-2011 3:37 PM


So what are these policies, and what harm are they preventing?
I don't really know specific policies. I'll try to give you the jist of my thinking:
I've spent my life, through great effort, doing what I can to yield the best possible future I can acheive. I've done what I think are all the right things: get educated, don't break the law, find a good job, be responsible. I've waited to have any children and live modestly to avoid overspending. I've succeeded and gotten myself into a good spot.
Through all this, I've seen a lot of old friends and strangers drop out of school, get arrested, barely hold a job, have kids early, waste money on bullshit...
I have other friends who couldn't catch a break, had some bad luck, but have been trying nonetheless.
I'm willing to help other people, but they have to want to help themselves. Throwing money at people who aren't interested in bettering themselves doesn't help them at all, imho.
So, I do what I can to help my friends and aquaintences that I feel will actually benefit from the help. I don't throw money at people just because they are downtrodden, especially if I don't think it will help them.
I feel that the Democrats want to do more to get more to the less fortunate, but that they take all the choice in the matter out of my hands. I don't want to just throw my money in the general direction of the less fortunate. I like to have that decision myself as to who I'm helping because then I feel like I actually am helping.
Being near St. Louis, I get to compare two different states, Missouri the Red state, and Illinois the Blue state. If you go to the unemployment office in Missouri, they explain to you how you are going to have to be actively seeking employment and they want to see lists of companies and contacts that you're making in that search or your not going to get the benefits. If you go to the unemployment office in Illinois, they teach you how to fill out the forms in a way that it looks like your seeking employment, regardless of if you are or not, so that you can more easily receive the benefits.
I think that generally exemplifies the different approaches each side takes towards the whole thing.
I see the left's approach as not offering any incentive to putting in the great effort that I have towards setting myself up so that I can do this on my own without aid. Further, its seems that they are rewarding not putting the effort in by making it easier to get help if you didn't make it.
Not only do I dislike that approach, but I think it makes things worse off for everyone.
So the way the Republicans would be helping me is by stopping the Democrats from inadvertently making things worse.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by Taq, posted 03-31-2011 3:37 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 128 by Theodoric, posted 03-31-2011 5:29 PM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 129 by Theodoric, posted 03-31-2011 5:41 PM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 134 by Rahvin, posted 03-31-2011 6:26 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied
 Message 137 by Taq, posted 03-31-2011 6:57 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 127 of 440 (610638)
03-31-2011 5:19 PM
Reply to: Message 122 by Dr Adequate
03-31-2011 3:43 PM


The boogieman argument in its most basic form.
So who are "the other guys"? "Death Panels"? "Communists"? The people who "hate America" and "want the terrorists to win"? The Evil "Stealth Muslim" in the White House? Who specifically is trying to hurt you?
I don't think anyone is specifically trying to hurt me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-31-2011 3:43 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 138 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-31-2011 7:25 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 128 of 440 (610641)
03-31-2011 5:29 PM
Reply to: Message 126 by New Cat's Eye
03-31-2011 5:17 PM


Being near St. Louis, I get to compare two different states, Missouri the Red state, and Illinois the Blue state. If you go to the unemployment office in Missouri, they explain to you how you are going to have to be actively seeking employment and they want to see lists of companies and contacts that you're making in that search or your not going to get the benefits. If you go to the unemployment office in Illinois, they teach you how to fill out the forms in a way that it looks like your seeking employment, regardless of if you are or not, so that you can more easily receive the benefits.
Any evidence for this assertion? Sounds like right wing folklore to me.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-31-2011 5:17 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 130 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-31-2011 5:42 PM Theodoric has not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 129 of 440 (610643)
03-31-2011 5:41 PM
Reply to: Message 126 by New Cat's Eye
03-31-2011 5:17 PM


Just looked at both states websites. They both have a requirement that you keep a record of your work search.
This also goes to the right wing myth that the unemployed are jsut lazy dead beats that don't want to work. I have collected unemployment benefits twice in my life. I worked hard finding a new job. I think it is safe to say the vast majority of people on unemployment want to get off unemployment and get a new job.
Do you really think people want to live below poverty level?

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-31-2011 5:17 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 131 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-31-2011 5:47 PM Theodoric has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 130 of 440 (610644)
03-31-2011 5:42 PM
Reply to: Message 128 by Theodoric
03-31-2011 5:29 PM


Any evidence for this assertion?
No, none at all. It was personal experience. Take it or leave it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by Theodoric, posted 03-31-2011 5:29 PM Theodoric has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 131 of 440 (610646)
03-31-2011 5:47 PM
Reply to: Message 129 by Theodoric
03-31-2011 5:41 PM


Just looked at both states websites. They both have a requirement that you keep a record of your work search.
Yes, they did. I didn't emply otherwise. Those were the forms I was talking about.
In Missouri, they come at with: "you better do this or else".
In Illinois, they show you the easiest way to get the benefits.
This also goes to the right wing myth that the unemployed are jsut lazy dead beats that don't want to work.
I also described two different types of "the unemployed".
You're just looking for anything that might be an error on my part. You're not constructively discussing. You're letting this lead you to misunderstandings. This is why I think your an idiot.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 129 by Theodoric, posted 03-31-2011 5:41 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 132 by fearandloathing, posted 03-31-2011 6:07 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied
 Message 133 by hooah212002, posted 03-31-2011 6:13 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied
 Message 136 by Theodoric, posted 03-31-2011 6:34 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
fearandloathing
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 990
From: Burlington, NC, USA
Joined: 02-24-2011


Message 132 of 440 (610673)
03-31-2011 6:07 PM
Reply to: Message 131 by New Cat's Eye
03-31-2011 5:47 PM


Catholic Scientist writes:
I also described two different types of "the unemployed".
There will always be people who will take advantage of the system. Does that mean we should toss it out and leave the people who deserve it high and dry? Would you like to think that someone who deserved to get benefits, but didn't understand how to do the paperwork right was denied?
Edited by fearandloathing, : No reason given.

"I hate to advocate the use of drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they always worked for me." - Hunter S. Thompson

This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-31-2011 5:47 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 801 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 133 of 440 (610675)
03-31-2011 6:13 PM
Reply to: Message 131 by New Cat's Eye
03-31-2011 5:47 PM


In Illinois, they show you the easiest way to get
the benefits.
As a native flatlander, i feel you should qualify this statement with "the city i was in showed me the easiest way to get benefits". Not sure about Missouri though.

"What can be asserted without proof, can be dismissed without proof."-Hitch.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-31-2011 5:47 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


Message 134 of 440 (610678)
03-31-2011 6:26 PM
Reply to: Message 126 by New Cat's Eye
03-31-2011 5:17 PM


I'm willing to help other people, but they have to want to help themselves. Throwing money at people who aren't interested in bettering themselves doesn't help them at all, imho.
So, I do what I can to help my friends and aquaintences that I feel will actually benefit from the help. I don't throw money at people just because they are downtrodden, especially if I don't think it will help them.
What makes you think that the tiny subset of the population that you actually meet are those most in need of assistance?
What makes you think that you're at all a reasonable judge of who should or not receive aid?
What makes you think that social programs "throw money" at people as opposed to actually providing assistance?
What makes you think that your personal anecdotes, consisting of a small number of interactions with a tiny subset of the population, give you even remotely an idea of the real face of poverty, unemployment, welfare, etc in the United States?
I feel that the Democrats want to do more to get more to the less fortunate, but that they take all the choice in the matter out of my hands. I don't want to just throw my money in the general direction of the less fortunate. I like to have that decision myself as to who I'm helping because then I feel like I actually am helping.
Why do you believe that people in general will choose to help the less fortunate if the choice is left to themselves? What makes you feel that individuals are better at making those decisions than government agencies? What makes you think that your small-scale individual charity, even if applied on a national level, provides better net utility to the country than a government agency?
I think that generally exemplifies the different approaches each side takes towards the whole thing.
What makes you think that your single anecdote is in any way representative of the system as a whole? I live in a blue state. I had to fill out the paperwork and look for a job constantly when I was unemployed.
I see the left's approach as not offering any incentive to putting in the great effort that I have towards setting myself up so that I can do this on my own without aid. Further, its seems that they are rewarding not putting the effort in by making it easier to get help if you didn't make it.
If you've ever once lived on public assistance of any kind, you know that this is a crock. There's no such thing as a welfare queen, it's a myth. Unemployment barely provides enough money to live on - and if you lost a large enough income, it's often not enough to make ends meet with pre-existing mortgages and the like. You can;t live comfortably on unemployment - you can scrape by until you find a job. You have every incentive to get off your ass and find work - not the least being that if you're caught fraudulently claiming that you searched for work, you'll lose coverage, and you'll run out of benefits eventually anyway.
Not only do I dislike that approach, but I think it makes things worse off for everyone.
In what way, specifically? Be precise. Give numbers. What is the actual harm caused, beyond a statement of emotional preference that amounts to nothing more substantive than "I think blue is a better color?"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-31-2011 5:17 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 135 of 440 (610679)
03-31-2011 6:26 PM
Reply to: Message 117 by Theodoric
03-31-2011 3:06 PM


Easiest to just make a link with the URL. The standard URL is this:
http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?control=
To that you can add information for the MID to link to the specific message. So if the MID is 579677, you would add:
msg&m=579677
... to get:
http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?control=msg&m=579677
Which can be used in a named link to Moose's proposal to limit posting frequency.
Jon

Check out No webpage found at provided URL: Apollo's Temple!
Ignorance is temporary; you should be able to overcome it. - nwr

This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by Theodoric, posted 03-31-2011 3:06 PM Theodoric has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024