If you have a living wage, you don’t need food stamps nor subsidized housing. There are few, if any states, that offer free college tuition to its residents. You may oppose Social Security, but I don’t. Something approaching free health care can be a possibility.
I oppose all of the stuff I mentioned, but that should be no secret to anyone who has ever posted in these forums.
It actually works the other. Social Security, Medicare, and all the rest, are in danger because the aging population is greater than the younger generation. Bringing life in means all the goods and services required to help them will also be needed.
Try to sell that to anyone who subscribes to the junk that Marx and Engels created.
But we are also giving money to virtually all of the nations of the world instead of keeping it here? I do not know for a fact how much, but we could help stabilize the deficit by keeping that money here?
I agree, but liberty lost is very hard to regain.
Look up Bretton Woods Conference and tell me what you come up with, then refer back to my post where I stated that most of the economic mess we are in traces back to FDR (and Wilson had some key contributions)
WE can all have conversations about the economy and how best to make it stronger (I am personally on the side of smaller government and far less taxes). However, we depart sharply regarding the issue of life. The Deomcratic Party (the one you voted for) is rabidly pro-abortion, and any Catholic who votes for a Democrat is directly helping keep abortion legal.
You cannot regain it. That is why we had a Declaration of Independence. You can only get to the point where you are compelled to either submit to slavery or decide to throw off the shackles that bind you and push the restart button. I say the later is going to happen in relatively short order. But that is only my opinion.
Perhaps, we will see.
No onslaught, just a few questions. Do you think that Obama has been successful so far? Has the 787 billion in stimulus $$ helped the economy rebound? Or, to put it another way, which do you think will create jobs, the federal govt by taking money from business and redistributing it, or the business sector itself, investing and expanding because they are reasonably assured their $$ won’t be confiscated by govt to redistribute? Which do you think will give you more opportunities for your family, an expanding and robust economy based on increased business investment and activity, or a robust federal govt., increasing its power and scope? There are many people who voted for Obama and now regret that vote. Considering that the unemployment rate is now 9%, higher than when Obama took office, do you think his policies have been successful and that he deserves your vote?
Bush had eight years. He destroyed the economy in the end. If Obama doesn’t succeed in two terms, than it is his fault. But it’s ridiculous to say that he’s responsible for the mess. At least he did stop a depression like the 1930’s.
Voting for a politician who supports abortion is not voting for abortion. It’s voter intent that matters. I voted NDP here in Canada because I wanted job creation and more compassion for the middle class, not because of abortion
I think you just proved my point about one-issue voters only supporting right-wingers
The entire notion of being a one issue voter comes from academia. Professors and scholars have spread the completely false notion that being a single issue voter means one is less intelluctual or somehow less smart than those who do otherwise. That, of course, is absolute nonsense, yet people buy into that thinking all the time in order to justify their gravely immoral choices.
The economic mess was a group effort - the housing crisis which has driven the recession was thanks in no small part to the sub-prime mortgage bubble bursting - foreseen by many but not at all responded to by Barney Frank or Chris Dodd. There is much blame to go around - true, it happened on Bush’s watch so he gets some of the blame but its the height of partisan hyperbole to say the “Bush destroyed the economy”.
Just a slight correction…there was no left and right in the mid-19th century as we know the terms. It just reflects how parties once sat in the French Parliament in the 19th century…
Oh, come on. The depression ended around 1939, which was under FDR’s watch. If he was terrible, he wouldn’t have been voted by the people to serve four terms
Ya, I know that is the story they tell in schools. Thank God I homeschool and understand economics. FDR put ruinous policies in place that are STILL messing up our economy.