Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
8 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   How Does Republican Platform Help Middle Class?
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 151 of 440 (610880)
04-03-2011 10:13 AM
Reply to: Message 148 by dwise1
04-02-2011 11:07 PM


The GOP
The Grand Old Party has a long history of being supportive of the middle class. Remember that the reason the South was a Democratic stronghold for so long was that the Republicans were seen as being for them "Uppity Black folk".
Teddy Roosevelt was the President that first made big Corporations sit down and negotiate with labor, that busted trusts, that built the Park System, that said individual rights end where public rights begin.
Ike, with all his flaws, clearly saw the duty of Government to be the 900 pound gorilla that stood between rampant capitalism and the general public.
What happened though was a coup where the Christian Right totally took over a party and turned the Republican Party into a theocratic one.
BUT look at what Reagan did to California as Governor. The best education system in the world simply got thrown away.
Edited by jar, : appalin spallin and left out said

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 148 by dwise1, posted 04-02-2011 11:07 PM dwise1 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 171 by ramoss, posted 04-04-2011 3:40 PM jar has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 152 of 440 (610882)
04-03-2011 10:18 AM
Reply to: Message 150 by bluescat48
04-03-2011 1:45 AM


bluescat48 writes:
I am not doubting that you are a conservative, but just what would you call the so called conservatives that are running your party at this time?
If you look at the classic definitions, they are modern Fascists; corporatist, highly nationalistic, strongly opposed to socialism and communism, favoring one religion, supporting order over all.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by bluescat48, posted 04-03-2011 1:45 AM bluescat48 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 153 by bluescat48, posted 04-03-2011 11:10 AM jar has not replied

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4189 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 153 of 440 (610885)
04-03-2011 11:10 AM
Reply to: Message 152 by jar
04-03-2011 10:18 AM


Amen. You would be what I would call a moderate (rational) conservative. I agree with your interpretation of the "far-right" as Fascists.

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002
Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969
Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by jar, posted 04-03-2011 10:18 AM jar has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 154 of 440 (610911)
04-03-2011 5:46 PM
Reply to: Message 108 by hooah212002
03-31-2011 2:14 PM


I think we need to recruit a few more right wingers here to EvC. These two need assistance from the barrage of us socialist commies.
So you suspect that EvC may not be perfectly representative of the general political opinion, (and political knowledge) all across the U.S.? Very good!
Just to add a little more substance to this otherwise substance-less post, IMO your average republican voting american does so on the basis of the party's promise to keep taxes low and the government out of their life, and not much else.
They also do so on the basis of the country’s foundation, founding documents, knowledge of U.S. history, and human nature.
All the while spreading disinformation about "the other guys". This is spread by shouting louder than the other team and shutting down opposing views (NPR, anyone?).
NPR recently fired Juan Williams, a moderate liberal. I don’t watch NPR, but I wonder if you could name me any right wing extremists who are permitted to debate/share their opinions there. Just one. The percentages of liberal commentators/guests on Fox news may be small, but the list is long. Just off the top of my head; Kirsten Powers, Bob Beckel, Al Sharpton, Dennis Kucinich, Charles Rangel, Harold Ford. Fox news is loaded with debate and conflicting opinions. The mainstream media is not.
It's just that so many only see one side and believe what they see on their favorite news channel.
You’re absolutely right about that. I usually have ABC World News on after my local news each evening. About all I see there is liberalism, and slanted reporting. I don’t bother with the late night comedians however, a major source of news for many people.
Granted, none of this actually tells us why we, as knowledgeable individuals who do NOT succumb to the bullshit, should vote that way. But then again, free-thinkers are an unwelcome bunch on the right.
Are you a property owner?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by hooah212002, posted 03-31-2011 2:14 PM hooah212002 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 156 by crashfrog, posted 04-03-2011 5:55 PM marc9000 has replied
 Message 158 by hooah212002, posted 04-03-2011 6:03 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 155 of 440 (610912)
04-03-2011 5:55 PM
Reply to: Message 149 by crashfrog
04-02-2011 11:19 PM


Why would it "trickle down"? How does that jive with the ample evidence that things trickle up, instead?
You’d have to explain more thoroughly what you mean by trickle up. I don’t see those who are dependent on government being much benefit at all to those who are self sustaining. By trickle down, I mean that when those at the top are permitted to keep more of their earnings, they’re able to buy more things that those below them produce (luxury items like boats),and tend to replace things long before they’re worn out, simply because they’re tired of them. (like cars) Making usable used cars more available to others.
There's actually thirty years of evidence or more that strong social safety nets financed by progressive taxes, effective regulation, labor rights, and social justice actually do promote significant economic growth. Similarly there's about ten years of evidence that deregulation, union busting, and religious oppression are disastrous for the American economy.
The problem is, you’re not referring to useful products and services, the kind that people willingly pay for. You’re talking about work that accomplishes nothing directly marketable, something that must be paid for indirectly/unwittingly. Sure some of it is necessary, but much of it is not. It’s difficult to draw the line between how much safety is too much safety. Every unused safety product/service has to be paid for by someone. There are those who say that if one life is saved, this safety feature is worth it, but of course that’s false. We could lower the speed limits to 5mph and save 30,000 lives every year, but our society couldn’t function.
It wouldn't be the first thing he turned out to be dead wrong about.
If you believe that handout programs increase productivity, or that taxation on production increases production, it’s just something we have to agree to disagree on.
You act like deregulation is free, but who pays for the polluted air and water?
And how do you square that with property rights? Surely you'd recognize that your property rights enjoin me from dumping thousands of pounds of burning garbage into your front lawn. Right? Isn't it a right you have, to not have nuisances and refuse dropped onto your land without your permission?
These are emotional talking points put fourth by environmentalist extremists. Some environmentalism is necessary of course, but much of it is not. Many metropolitan areas over recent decades have been mandated by the EPA to perform auto emissions testing. It came and went in my area, as it has in many others. It’s easy to recognize as a power and money grab, far more than showing any concern for the environment.
So why doesn't that right extend to your air and water? How do you square property rights with an untrammeled right of corporations to pollute land, air, and water that belongs to other people?
You must completely trust the government officials who administer these programs. I don’t. Obviously, the U.S. founding fathers didn’t either, considering the way the Bill of Rights is worded, or the famous quotes from some of them. Ever hear the phrase, give me liberty or give me death? Can you understand the passion behind that? When I was in school, I couldn’t. 40 years later, I now can. Are you a property owner?
There's zero evidence that unemployment is driven by environmental regulation. Our nation's high unemployment rate and declining wealth of the middle class is almost entirely due to a deregulated financial services sector.
In the 1970’s before the EPA was 10 years old, it shut down a U.S. Steel plant in Gary Indiana, putting those steel employees out of work. I remember seeing it in the news at that time (deep in an obscure section in the back page of the newspaper) . There are countless other examples of the EPA destroying business and destroying jobs, but they seldom get much attention in the news. The EPA is a self serving bureaucracy, and corruption is involved.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 149 by crashfrog, posted 04-02-2011 11:19 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 159 by crashfrog, posted 04-03-2011 6:08 PM marc9000 has not replied
 Message 164 by Theodoric, posted 04-03-2011 8:34 PM marc9000 has not replied
 Message 184 by ZenMonkey, posted 04-05-2011 12:01 AM marc9000 has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 156 of 440 (610913)
04-03-2011 5:55 PM
Reply to: Message 154 by marc9000
04-03-2011 5:46 PM


NPR recently fired Juan Williams, a moderate liberal.
Juan Williams hasn't ever been a "moderate liberal", which is why he was immediately picked up by Fox News.
I don’t watch NPR, but I wonder if you could name me any right wing extremists who are permitted to debate/share their opinions there.
In the past week? Rand Paul. Michelle Bachmann. Mitt Romney. Ken Cuchinelli. Mario Loyola. William Galston.
Are you a property owner?
Are you? How do you square property rights with an untrammeled right of industry corporations to deposit pollution and garbage in the air and water you own?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 154 by marc9000, posted 04-03-2011 5:46 PM marc9000 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 157 by marc9000, posted 04-03-2011 6:01 PM crashfrog has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 157 of 440 (610915)
04-03-2011 6:01 PM
Reply to: Message 156 by crashfrog
04-03-2011 5:55 PM


Juan Williams hasn't ever been a "moderate liberal", which is why he was immediately picked up by Fox News.
He's not a conservative, and he wasn't "picked up" by Fox News after that firing. He already worked there, which is a large part of why he was fired.
In the past week? Rand Paul. Michelle Bachmann. Mitt Romney. Ken Cuchinelli. Mario Loyola. William Galston.
Well I just may have to watch NPR, and see just how fair and balanced they really are.
Are you?
Yes I am, and since you didn't answer my question I suspect you may be a renter. I have little time to discuss liberty with renters.
How do you square property rights with an untrammeled right of industry corporations to deposit pollution and garbage in the air and water you own?
They've never had "untrammeled rights to pollute", even before the EPA was founded. Again, emotional talking points, nothing more.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 156 by crashfrog, posted 04-03-2011 5:55 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 160 by crashfrog, posted 04-03-2011 6:13 PM marc9000 has not replied
 Message 165 by Theodoric, posted 04-03-2011 8:36 PM marc9000 has not replied
 Message 166 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-03-2011 9:26 PM marc9000 has not replied

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


Message 158 of 440 (610916)
04-03-2011 6:03 PM
Reply to: Message 154 by marc9000
04-03-2011 5:46 PM


NPR recently fired Juan Williams, a moderate liberal. I don’t watch NPR, but I wonder if you could name me any right wing extremists who are permitted to debate/share their opinions there. Just one. The percentages of liberal commentators/guests on Fox news may be small, but the list is long. Just off the top of my head; Kirsten Powers, Bob Beckel, Al Sharpton, Dennis Kucinich, Charles Rangel, Harold Ford. Fox news is loaded with debate and conflicting opinions. The mainstream media is not.
You don't know what NPR is, do you? How does one "watch" NPR?

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 154 by marc9000, posted 04-03-2011 5:46 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 159 of 440 (610917)
04-03-2011 6:08 PM
Reply to: Message 155 by marc9000
04-03-2011 5:55 PM


You’d have to explain more thoroughly what you mean by trickle up.
A transfer of wealth from the middle class to the rich. You know, that income redistribution conservatives are always on about.
The problem is, you’re not referring to useful products and services, the kind that people willingly pay for.
No, I am referring to usable products and services, the kind people willingly pay for. It's the middle class who are primarily engaged in the production of such goods and services. The productivity of the rich is incredibly low because they're fundamentally not engaged in the production of useful goods and services; they're predominantly engaged in finance, which largely transfers wealth from the middle class to the wealthy.
These are emotional talking points put fourth by environmentalist extremists.
No, it's a genuine question I'm asking you about how you square your belief in property rights with your belief that industrial corporations have an untrammeled right to deposit unwanted garbage and pollution in air and water you own.
It's a real question. I'm completely serious about it and I'd like an answer - how do you square those completely contradictory positions? If I own some water and some air, how on Earth could it be "property rights" for someone with no claim to that water or air to deposit pollutants in it? Property rights would be my right to restrain someone from doing so, not their nonexistent right to do so.
You must completely trust the government officials who administer these programs.
I don't, but clearly their self-interest more closely aligns with mine, and my personal property rights, than do the interests of people who run industrial paper factories or coal-burning power plants, since what it's their personal self-interest is to deposit the waste products of those industries into my own water, land, and air without my permission or any compensation being paid for me. It's obviously a lot better for their bottom line to simply steal access to my water, land, and air rather than pay money for the proper disposal of those wastes. On the other hand, government officials who allow industries to pollute all willy-nilly will, at some point, lose their jobs about it.
Ever hear the phrase, give me liberty or give me death?
Commonly attributed to Patrick Henry. Do you think Patrick Henry was referring to an untrammeled right to deposit garbage and pollution on other people's land, water, and air? Could you identify the Constitutional amendment that grants that right? Please be specific.
Are you a property owner?
Sure. Are you? Can you explain how you square property rights with an untrammeled right of industry corporations to deposit garbage and pollution on other people's land, water, and air?
In the 1970’s before the EPA was 10 years old, it shut down a U.S. Steel plant in Gary Indiana, putting those steel employees out of work.
Were the people who ran that steel mill stealing access to other people's land, water, and air, and depositing unwanted pollution and garbage there?
As a matter of fact, that's exactly what they were doing. It's unfortunate for the people who worked there, but they were engaged unwittingly in a conspiracy to violate people's property rights. And aren't property rights pretty important? You keep asking people if they own property, so I must assume you consider property rights of utmost importance. Am I wrong about that? Please advise.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 155 by marc9000, posted 04-03-2011 5:55 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 160 of 440 (610918)
04-03-2011 6:13 PM
Reply to: Message 157 by marc9000
04-03-2011 6:01 PM


He's not a conservative, and he wasn't "picked up" by Fox News after that firing. He already worked there, which is a large part of why he was fired.
Oh, I see. And he was supposed to be Fox News' only liberal, or something?
No, he was very much a conservative. That's why he continues to work at Fox News and be embraced by the conservative community.
Well I just may have to watch NPR
You understand that you're talking about a radio station, right? Just curious.
Yes I am, and since you didn't answer my question I suspect you may be a renter.
No, I did answer your question. I own property. You've not answered the question I asked you, however, which is "how do you square property rights with an untrammeled right of industry corporations to deposit garbage and pollution in other people's land, air, and water"?
I suspect you may be a renter since you don't understand property rights.
They've never had "untrammeled rights to pollute"
So then you admit that the EPA is a crucial and important government agency that protects the property rights of American citizens, since corporations don't have an untrammeled right to deposit garbage and pollution on other people's land, water, and air.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 157 by marc9000, posted 04-03-2011 6:01 PM marc9000 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 161 by arachnophilia, posted 04-03-2011 7:14 PM crashfrog has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 161 of 440 (610925)
04-03-2011 7:14 PM
Reply to: Message 160 by crashfrog
04-03-2011 6:13 PM


crashfrog writes:
No, I did answer your question. I own property. You've not answered the question I asked you, however, which is "how do you square property rights with an untrammeled right of industry corporations to deposit garbage and pollution in other people's land, air, and water"?
I suspect you may be a renter since you don't understand property rights.
correct me if i'm wrong, but isn't protection of private property a conservative issue?

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 160 by crashfrog, posted 04-03-2011 6:13 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 162 by crashfrog, posted 04-03-2011 7:57 PM arachnophilia has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 162 of 440 (610932)
04-03-2011 7:57 PM
Reply to: Message 161 by arachnophilia
04-03-2011 7:14 PM


correct me if i'm wrong, but isn't protection of private property a conservative issue?
I thought it was, but clearly Marc is some kind of right-wing communist who believes that you can't own your own land, or water, or air. Or apparently rent out things you own, since he views the practice of renting as inherently illegitimate.
Well, whatever. Of course the conservative project has always been one about telling other people what they can and can't do with their land, with their water, or with their bodies.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 161 by arachnophilia, posted 04-03-2011 7:14 PM arachnophilia has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 163 by jar, posted 04-03-2011 8:05 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 163 of 440 (610934)
04-03-2011 8:05 PM
Reply to: Message 162 by crashfrog
04-03-2011 7:57 PM


crashfrog writes:
Well, whatever. Of course the conservative project has always been one about telling other people what they can and can't do with their land, with their water, or with their bodies.
Well, not always. Only since the Christian Cult of Ignorance coup.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 162 by crashfrog, posted 04-03-2011 7:57 PM crashfrog has not replied

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


Message 164 of 440 (610945)
04-03-2011 8:34 PM
Reply to: Message 155 by marc9000
04-03-2011 5:55 PM


In the 1970’s before the EPA was 10 years old, it shut down a U.S. Steel plant in Gary Indiana, putting those steel employees out of work.
Really?
The Gary plant is still producing steel.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 155 by marc9000, posted 04-03-2011 5:55 PM marc9000 has not replied

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


Message 165 of 440 (610946)
04-03-2011 8:36 PM
Reply to: Message 157 by marc9000
04-03-2011 6:01 PM


I have little time to discuss liberty with renters.
Are you fucking serious?
You right wing elitists. You think people that don't own property are not actual member of your society?
Edited by Theodoric, : db code

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 157 by marc9000, posted 04-03-2011 6:01 PM marc9000 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 167 by bluescat48, posted 04-04-2011 6:06 AM 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