It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

For the hating Dems and Antifa Clowns.

page: 7
16
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 15 2018 @ 12:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: introvert

It's the rise of the "I got mine, # you!" belief in conservative politics.


Versus the rise of "I don't have it, so I am going to forcibly take it from you" politics of the left?


Have an example?




posted on Aug, 15 2018 @ 12:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: introvert

It's the rise of the "I got mine, # you!" belief in conservative politics.


And the biggest kick in the balls is that these guys aren't even conservative. They are cry baby Right Wing authoritarians that want to use their politics as a means of control over those they disagree with.

Actually it's the Koch brothers. They have been dictating modern conservative policy for a long time now through a GROSS misunderstanding of how Libertarianism is supposed to work.

Now with Trump it not only doesn't pass the smell test, it doesn't even LOOK like conservative policies with policies like the tariffs and trade wars.



posted on Aug, 15 2018 @ 12:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: introvert

It's the rise of the "I got mine, # you!" belief in conservative politics.


And the biggest kick in the balls is that these guys aren't even conservative. They are cry baby Right Wing authoritarians that want to use their politics as a means of control over those they disagree with.

Actually it's the Koch brothers. They have been dictating modern conservative policy for a long time now through a GROSS misunderstanding of how Libertarianism is supposed to work.

Now with Trump it not only doesn't pass the smell test, it doesn't even LOOK like conservative policies with policies like the tariffs and trade wars.


Exactly.

Had an interesting conversation with a certain group of individuals yesterday about a topic similar to what you mention.

They expressed quite a bit of concern that their ideology, conservatism, has been hijacked by the Republicans and bastardized to no end.

Conservatism in America is no longer about conservatism. It's a meme. It's a convenient word for posers.



posted on Aug, 15 2018 @ 01:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

You know what else is flawed? The belief that anything involving Socialism in this country is doomed to failure or will result in insolvency.


I think I explained in my other email how/when it does actually work, so no I do not think this above, and I do feel we need social programs. The biggest problem is when the Government is involved it cost too much and you get too little, so I'm not sure how to fix that without starting at bed rock and working up from there. As example Obamacare was known to be a failure on day one, and that had more to do with it trying to work within a flawed insurance system instead of being a social program.



posted on Aug, 15 2018 @ 01:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero

It's called balance. You don't let the government be too involved and you don't cede too much power to corporations.



posted on Aug, 15 2018 @ 01:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Where did you get those numbers from?


The World Factbook



It should be noted that the blue states (which contain most of the major US cities in the country) tend to take in more tax money then give out. It is the red states then tend to be bigger takes of welfare programs. As it seems, people in cities are better taken care of and can get back on their feet.


apples and oranges..comparing big cities to red states...lol



Also, where did you get the statistic that less than 50% of our citizenry is working? Even the most lenient way of calculating our unemployment (U6) only has 7.5% of the population unemployed.


Simple math of a workforce of 160 million and a population of 330 million...once again you tend to pick what works for you as in this case 7.5% unemployment...So who are all those others not employed? You need to look at what is considered as part of the 7.5%



This is a terrible point, because it ignores the fact that health costs are inflated in the US due to a built in buffer for insurance companies to negotiate the prices down. Also, the pharmaceutical industry is notorious for jacking up the profits of its medications 1000%. Comparing our health care costs to a country with socialized medicine is impossible and tells us nothing one way or the other.


My point is we can not socialize our healthcare under the system we have, not sure why you can not understand that. Sanders was just proving my point in his 4 trillion dollar cost. We pay more for less healthcare...need to completely overhaul the system to actually make socialized healthcare work.



posted on Aug, 15 2018 @ 01:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Xtrozero

It's called balance. You don't let the government be too involved and you don't cede too much power to corporations.


We can agree on this, to move our system to socialism has a tendency to shift that balance too much in the Government direction. I'm not saying it can't be done, but humans have a tendency to make poor choices in either direction.
edit on 15-8-2018 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 15 2018 @ 01:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero
The World Factbook

You going to source it so we can all verify?


apples and oranges..comparing big cities to red states...lol

I said blue states.


Simple math of a workforce of 160 million and a population of 330 million...once again you tend to pick what works for you as in this case 7.5% unemployment...So who are all those others not employed? You need to look at what is considered as part of the 7.5%

Children, elderly and retired, disabled, those not looking for work, etc. Most of that number is retired people or children btw, with a heavy lean on the retired. But that's because our population is aging faster than new people are being born.



My point is we can not socialize our healthcare under the system we have, not sure why you can not understand that. Sanders was just proving my point in his 4 trillion dollar cost. We pay more for less healthcare...need to completely overhaul the system to actually make socialized healthcare work.

Ok. I'm game for that. Our health care system has got to be the most inefficient and greedy of the 1st world.
edit on 15-8-2018 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 15 2018 @ 01:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Xtrozero

It's called balance. You don't let the government be too involved and you don't cede too much power to corporations.


We can agree on this, to move our system to socialism has a tendency to shift that balance too much in the Government direction. I'm not saying it can't be done, but humans have a tendency to make poor choices in either direction.

Our system has been moving steadily away from socialism for the last 40 years or so and corruption and wealth inequality has steadily risen while wage growth has had a pitiful growth rate since.



posted on Aug, 15 2018 @ 01:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: introvert

It's the rise of the "I got mine, # you!" belief in conservative politics.


Versus the rise of "I don't have it, so I am going to forcibly take it from you" politics of the left?


Have an example?


Oh here we go playing dumb again...

Damn near every leftist politician runs on free sh*t for the masses to be paid for by the productive. Taxes are forcibly taking it from someone else.



posted on Aug, 15 2018 @ 01:50 PM
link   
a reply to: skywatcher44

Do you conservatives really think this site is flooded with socialists and Democrats? Sure, they might be a few on here, more Dem's than socialists I guess, but they are the minority whereas conservatives infest this place.

So who are you writing this thread for, nonexistent ATS socialists or begging for stars and flags from your fellow conservatives? The latter, right?



posted on Aug, 15 2018 @ 02:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: [post=23678273]

You going to source it so we can all verify?


No, don't care if you believe me or not...5 second Goggle would work too.



I said blue states.


You said blue states have bigger cities and so bigger cites take care of their population better...I disagree, but hey, then you mixed in red states, so not sure your point.



Children, elderly and retired, disabled, those not looking for work, etc. Most of that number is retired people or children btw, with a heavy lean on the retired. But that's because our population is aging faster than new people are being born.


In Norway over 60% of the population is working...in America under 50% of the population is working...once again not sure what this has to do with anything you are talking about, a person not working for any number of reasons is still not working. 7.5% is based on people looking to work.




Ok. I'm game for that. Our health care system has got to be the most inefficient and greedy of the 1st world.


Its a mess...



posted on Aug, 15 2018 @ 03:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero
No, don't care if you believe me or not...5 second Goggle would work too.

Burden of proof lies on the one making the claim. It's a logical fallacy to require the person you are talking to do your research for you.


You said blue states have bigger cities and so bigger cites take care of their population better...I disagree, but hey, then you mixed in red states, so not sure your point.

Believe what you will, but the numbers don't lie:
AP FACT CHECK: Blue high-tax states fund red low-tax states

In fact, most high-tax states send more money to Washington than they get back in federal spending. Most low-tax states make a profit from the federal government’s system of taxing and spending.


THE FACTS:

Connecticut residents paid an average of $15,643 per person in federal taxes in 2015, according to a report by the Rockefeller Institute of Government. Massachusetts paid $13,582 per person, New Jersey paid $13,137 and New York paid $12,820.

California residents paid an average of $10,510.

At the other end, Mississippi residents paid an average of $5,740 per person, while West Virginia paid $6,349, Kentucky paid $6,626 and South Carolina paid $6,665.

Low-tax red states also fare better when you take into account federal spending.

Mississippi received $2.13 for every tax dollar the state sent to Washington in 2015, according to the Rockefeller study. West Virginia received $2.07, Kentucky got $1.90 and South Carolina got $1.71.

Meanwhile, New Jersey received 74 cents in federal spending for tax every dollar the state sent to Washington. New York received 81 cents, Connecticut received 82 cents and Massachusetts received 83 cents.

California fared a bit better than other blue states. It received 96 cents for every dollar the state sent to Washington.

On average, states received $1.14 in federal spending for every tax dollar they sent to Washington. That’s why the federal government has a budget deficit.


In Norway over 60% of the population is working...in America under 50% of the population is working...once again not sure what this has to do with anything you are talking about, a person not working for any number of reasons is still not working. 7.5% is based on people looking to work.

I don't understand why a certain threshold of workers need to be achieved for social programs to work. Do you happen to know what that threshold is? The way I see it, we have social programs already and regardless of what you or I think is the true unemployment number they are currently working even if they tend to be inefficient.



posted on Aug, 15 2018 @ 03:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: introvert

It's the rise of the "I got mine, # you!" belief in conservative politics.


Versus the rise of "I don't have it, so I am going to forcibly take it from you" politics of the left?


Have an example?


Oh here we go playing dumb again...

Damn near every leftist politician runs on free sh*t for the masses to be paid for by the productive.



If damn near every lefty politician is doing what you claim, you should be able to provide an example of one of them saying "I don't have it, so I am going to forcibly take it from you".

Please enlighten me. I'm dumb.



Taxes are forcibly taking it from someone else.


Taxes are constitutional. Were the founding father Leftists?
edit on 15-8-2018 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 15 2018 @ 03:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Xtrozero
No, don't care if you believe me or not...5 second Goggle would work too.

Burden of proof lies on the one making the claim. It's a logical fallacy to require the person you are talking to do your research for you.


You said blue states have bigger cities and so bigger cites take care of their population better...I disagree, but hey, then you mixed in red states, so not sure your point.

Believe what you will, but the numbers don't lie:
AP FACT CHECK: Blue high-tax states fund red low-tax states

In fact, most high-tax states send more money to Washington than they get back in federal spending. Most low-tax states make a profit from the federal government’s system of taxing and spending.


THE FACTS:

Connecticut residents paid an average of $15,643 per person in federal taxes in 2015, according to a report by the Rockefeller Institute of Government. Massachusetts paid $13,582 per person, New Jersey paid $13,137 and New York paid $12,820.

California residents paid an average of $10,510.

At the other end, Mississippi residents paid an average of $5,740 per person, while West Virginia paid $6,349, Kentucky paid $6,626 and South Carolina paid $6,665.

Low-tax red states also fare better when you take into account federal spending.

Mississippi received $2.13 for every tax dollar the state sent to Washington in 2015, according to the Rockefeller study. West Virginia received $2.07, Kentucky got $1.90 and South Carolina got $1.71.

Meanwhile, New Jersey received 74 cents in federal spending for tax every dollar the state sent to Washington. New York received 81 cents, Connecticut received 82 cents and Massachusetts received 83 cents.

California fared a bit better than other blue states. It received 96 cents for every dollar the state sent to Washington.

On average, states received $1.14 in federal spending for every tax dollar they sent to Washington. That’s why the federal government has a budget deficit.


In Norway over 60% of the population is working...in America under 50% of the population is working...once again not sure what this has to do with anything you are talking about, a person not working for any number of reasons is still not working. 7.5% is based on people looking to work.

I don't understand why a certain threshold of workers need to be achieved for social programs to work. Do you happen to know what that threshold is? The way I see it, we have social programs already and regardless of what you or I think is the true unemployment number they are currently working even if they tend to be inefficient.


This is a good example of lying by omission and showing how you simply don't have the ability to look deeper and connect dots. The numbers the AP article is using is total federal spending although they don't link to the source.

What is in federal spending? Military expenditures. Did it ever occur to you that military spending may account for why red states appear to get a lot from the government, not that they are necessarily say sucking at the government teet for welfare. You know, those states don't have a say in whether they have military bases...

Here is a link to military spending by state:

Military Spending by State

Notice you see a lot red states highlighted which would be affecting the totals in the AP story you linked.

I don't just take everything at face value and want to know the details...



posted on Aug, 15 2018 @ 03:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Our system has been moving steadily away from socialism for the last 40 years or so and corruption and wealth inequality has steadily risen while wage growth has had a pitiful growth rate since.


I just do not like this talking point. Many live payday to payday for many reasons. I know people who make more than 200k a year that live payday to payday. If you and I made the same money and I saved 100 bucks a month for 10 years and you didn't, you could say it is unfair that I have 12,000 times your savings.

Whether some rich person has 10 million, 100 million or 100 billion it doesn't really change that people will continue to live payday to payday.

The big question is do you think if we took all the money from the rich and made a socialized utopia would people have a more quality life?

I just do not think humans work that way....



posted on Aug, 15 2018 @ 03:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Burden of proof lies on the one making the claim. It's a logical fallacy to require the person you are talking to do your research for you.


You demanding something doesn't mean a burden is place on me in some magical fashion. I'm not debating you, so as I said...I don't care if you believe me or not.



posted on Aug, 15 2018 @ 04:25 PM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker
I find no good points in socialism. I quote Sir Winston Churchill, " Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery". No more needs to be said.



posted on Aug, 15 2018 @ 04:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Ansuzrune
a reply to: CriticalStinker
I find no good points in socialism. I quote Sir Winston Churchill, " Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery". No more needs to be said.


I mostly agree (at least for America). Hence why I said I lean right fiscally, but left socially. Not to mean socialist, but rather the social platform like gay rights and things of that nature.



posted on Aug, 15 2018 @ 07:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: skywatcher44
It will all end in tears and O much worse. Socialism, communism, free this sh*t free that sh*t, hating the capitalism that has gotten you your freedoms and most of your wealth.


Interestingly enough, the only people who use the word "free" in relation to Socialism or Communism are conservatives. I've never heard a self-proclaimed Socialist EVER say that social programs are free stuff.
Well yah except Bernie Sanders introduced a bill for free college tuition for students in families with incomes under $125,000 and community college free for all... maybe it's all in how we view the word "free". Maybe it's another Bill Clinton type definition of a word.
college.usatoday.com...
We know it's not truly free because someone has to pay. We all pay through taxes, including the hidden tax of inflation.

edit on 15-8-2018 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join