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.

 

Tired of left vs. right? The Populist Party revival may just be for you.

page: 3
10
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 09:57 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 

Do you think it's time we try another method to stop drug use? Instead of just cracking skulls and throwing people in prison?




posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 09:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by LexiconRiot
In what realm are you able to control what you tax dollars are used for? No one is forced to use Government Healthcare however the option should be available. Taxes are allocated with the budget and not predetermined when they are collected.


My point is that there are many entitlements that my tax dollars are used for that I have no access to, whether I want them or not. My paycheck is gutted for welfare, but I make to too much to qualify for it, even though "too much" is relative. Yet that money taken from me is given indiscriminately to anyone that qualifies, whether or not they are actually trying to make life better for themselves, or just sitting back sucking on the teat. Healthcare is not a right. Social Security is not a right. Medicare is not a right. Yet I have to pay into them, while others benefit.

/TOA



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 10:04 PM
link   
reply to post by joechip
 


your statistics do not take into account inflation of the rise of healthcare cost nor the income level adjustment

for the period of a decade.

please man.


i am done here lexi has spoken to get back on the topic

my apology to lexi



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 10:09 PM
link   
reply to post by The Old American
 


I would agree that the working classes should NOT be paying the sorts of taxes at the kind of rates they are. The people at the top for whom money is a game of oneupmanship who have over 90% of the wealth in country...and who have more or less taken PUBLIC resources in order to gain their great fortunes--they actually do owe us some basic survival-based "entitlements." Why do they owe us this? Because we work for them and have made them the billionaires they are.

And even if you contend that they don't owe us anything, being a part of the larger society-unless they kill us all, they have to step out of their gated communities every now and then, and it might actually behoove them to not have angry, sick, hungry masses everywhere.

edit to add--It occured to me that the fatcats also live in a democratic republic and that should have a little more of an effect on their tax rates than it does, and it's probably the sentiment you expressed, that THEY use to keep their tax rates low...using the working class sentiment against the working class and the poor. If this movement is Populist, then the masses must not allow the fact their own lack of resources to be used against the even poorer. If you do, you continue to enrich the fatcats,
edit on 8-6-2011 by joechip because: edit to add.

edit on 8-6-2011 by joechip because: to add



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 10:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Old American

Originally posted by LexiconRiot
In what realm are you able to control what you tax dollars are used for? No one is forced to use Government Healthcare however the option should be available. Taxes are allocated with the budget and not predetermined when they are collected.


My point is that there are many entitlements that my tax dollars are used for that I have no access to, whether I want them or not. My paycheck is gutted for welfare, but I make to too much to qualify for it, even though "too much" is relative. Yet that money taken from me is given indiscriminately to anyone that qualifies, whether or not they are actually trying to make life better for themselves, or just sitting back sucking on the teat. Healthcare is not a right. Social Security is not a right. Medicare is not a right. Yet I have to pay into them, while others benefit.

/TOA


I do not mean to attack you but could what I am reading be "Welfare envy"? The simple truth is once you reach a certain level of poverty it is often, but not always, near impossible to pull yourself out.

The truth is that being poor and on welfare isn't easy or fun. It is often a vicious cycle of bad stuff happening. Not to mention there is profit made out of keeping poor people poor. When we make a concentrated effort to lessen the wealth gap from the ultra poor and the ultra rich it is not an attack on the rich. The fact is minimum wage is $7.25 an hour. (This is the federal min.)

7.25 * 40 = 290 a week. Most months that is about 1160 a month. Take out your rent; lets be nice and say that its low at 450 a month. Then your food costs. Assuming you are single with no kids that is about 150 a month. Put in electricity water trash heat and other assorted living costs that are necessary call it 150. Car insurance is another 130. Gas to operate said vehicle to go to work to be nice 100 a month.

At the end of the month I have $180 in my pocket. This is assuming you don't get sick have hospital bills any previous debt and nothing bad happens at all. Say for the whole year all I do is work and sleep. I save every penny. At years end I have saved up $2,160.00.
With that I can: Buy 1 crappy on its last leg used SUV.(Used car prices raise with Oil prices.)
I can pay for 1 (maybe) medical issue.
Maybe I can move into a nicer apartment. (You know as long as it doesn't cost more)
Maybe I can take a well deserved vacation.

Oh crap my Mom died. Looks like i have to use that money to pay for a plane ticket and week off work to go home and pay my respects.

I know this may seem like an extreme to some but for the working poor it is everyday life. When I see people complain. 'My tax dollars go to pay for those scum' it makes me sick. I'm glad that isn't my life anymore but for myself and many others that is the only way to live without dealing drugs or committing crimes. Taxes suck. So does being poor.



posted on Jun, 8 2011 @ 10:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
they are one in the same healthcare and drugs and narcotics and big pharma they all effect the price of healthcare.

the cost to the economy of lost income to the cost of other taxpayers paying for their usage.


I agree drug addicts and abusers have a negative impact on the economy. They cost taxpayers money.

However, the "War on Drugs" amplifies these problems, it does not fight them.

Plus the cost of prohibition is incredible.

Interdiciton (A massive waste of police resources)
Violence (empowers people willing to be violent)
Prisons (merges drugs and violence)
Lost Tax Revenue
An artificial battle between law enforcement and (some non-violent) people.

After all this, the "War on Drugs" has not decreased drug use.

It has made no positive changes. It has created violence, imprisoned millions, and wasted billions.



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 04:21 AM
link   
As I see it, I will be voting for any candidate who's agenda is for the people and America. The fix is going to be painful, but first we have to oust every single elected official that is connected to TPTB who have so clearly demonstrated over this past decade that the destruction of the USA is their main goal. This economy is going to tank and it's going to get attacked no doubt. We need to empower every single member of Congress that is speaking up against the status quo, NOW. Show them your support, as this small band of people can help make a difference.



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 06:03 AM
link   
reply to post by LexiconRiot
 


Question... how can you say that health care is a RIGHT, and then say that the Patriot Act is unconstitutional? You can't have it both ways. Health care is not a right, nor is providing health care a constitutional function of government (Article 1, section 8 US Constitution) Providing health care is not listed among the enumerated powers in Art 1 Sec 8, and therefore is not a function of Congress. You can't advocate one idea that is unconstitutional, and then turn around and not support another because it is unconstitutional. You are contradicting yourself, and clearly can not be taken seriously.

Health care is also not listed in the bill of rights, although one could try and make the argument that the 9th amendment implies that health care, among others not listed, could be a right, but then we are back to article one, section 8 again. I'll meet you in the middle and say that an individual state does have the authority to enact a state wide, universal health care plan as per the 10th amendment like Massachusetts did, but it is unconstitutional at the federal level.



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 07:21 AM
link   
I guess I really don't know American politics because from what I see in the OP, this is what I define as left side with socialism parts.

And you guys, you guys like it, wow for once.

I guess it might go downfall from here on since I said the S word...
edit on 9-6-2011 by User8911 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 07:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Finalized
 


Ron Paul is the one to vote for this coming election. PLEASE people....do not get lost in others B.S. like last election. The only real change will come when Ron Paul takes over office....do not be fooled again. We need someone who is not afraid to stand up for "We the People"!

Thanks!



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 07:56 AM
link   
I have one problem with the whole thing I feel needs some pointing out ... the name and reputation. As pointed out in the OP, the party was known as "The People's Party". Have there been any such parties in other countries that have successfully avoided being viewed as Communist - or eventually becoming communist in their doctrine? Even if you kept the party from being viewed that way, or shifting towards it, you still need to compete against the registered Communist Party of America. Calling the revival the Populist Party needs some rethinking.



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 08:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by LexiconRiot

Our platform is as follows:

• The removal of the national debt. To accomplish this we need to both cut spending and increase taxes. Spending cuts should come in the form of cutting defense budgets as well as entitlement spending. Reforming programs that are ineffectual or redundant. The increase in taxes could come as either a removal of the Bush tax cuts or enacting a national sales tax.

• Lower the cost of higher education. This can be accomplished by a cap on tuition for public schools as well as better funding for teachers and school programs. An education should not put you in debt for 20 years following graduation.

• Health care reform. Health care is a right not a privilege. For those who cannot afford private health insurance there should be an option provided by the government.

• Protect the press. Freedom of speech is vastly important. This is to include public prayer. The basis of all freedoms is free and open speech.

• Reforming the Tax Code. Debt wouldn’t be so easy for the country to incur if everyone were paying their taxes, this includes corporations.

• Regulated Campaign contributions. A corporation or public group should not be able to donate to candidates. All contributions must be disclosed publically and the expenses of each candidate should be of public record.

• Gay marriage or the removal of government acknowledgement of marriage. Simply put if marriage is defined by the religious standards of marriage then it should not be a governmentally recognized institution.

• Repeal the Patriot Act. This is unconstitutional legislation. The violation of civil liberties cannot be allowed.

• Protect the second amendment. If I wish to bear arms it is my right as an American.

• De-criminalize drugs. The cost of jailing and prosecuting for drug related crimes causes more debt. You cannot protect people from themselves.


1. I don't agree with raising taxes or adding a new tax..we gave them money and they mismanaged it so why give them more?

2. I can somewhat agree with this as long as the federal government is not involved education should be in the states hand.

3. Agree

4. Agree somewhat

5. Agree

6. If a gay couple wants to get married let them the federal government should have nothing to say about this

7. Agree

8. Hell Yeah

9. Agree again if I want to use heroine that is my business. From msm to everyday life I notice that people like to be in other peoples business. I think all drugs should be legal or at least up to the states. What I do in my home should be none of your concern



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 08:21 AM
link   
The problem with so many "free" entitilements, is you have those who abuse them. I don't know if I agree that Health Care is a RIGHT. We have tons of illegals here now that are draining the tax dollars for "free" healthcare as it is.

Most of this is what the Libertarian Party supports, and they are the largest 3rd Party.
Also most is what Ron Paul supports, and he will get my vote.

I think if anything should be forced to be a RIGHT, it should be a JOB!
I think the FED should have to supply it's people with safety, security, stability.
I mean we have to have ZERO tolerance for crimes. The streets MUST be safe to walk.
The citizens should not be unemployed.
We need to get the illegals out, secure the border, have extreme harsh punishments for those that would rape, rob, kill, beat citizens.
And everyone MUST have a job. If this means prohibiting job outsourcing, and limiting goods imports, then that's what we need.
OUR US gov has failed it's people, and spits on them.

I know the board is international, but of course I am writing as an American.



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 09:25 AM
link   
Finally an American political party that will stick to the values of the Founding Fathers and the Constitution



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 10:37 AM
link   
In response to the idea that Health Care is not a right:

Firstly, I want to say I have nothing but respect to the founding fathers and their ideals. In fact I believe their ways are the best and most efficient way to run a government. With that said I would also like to say they were not Omnipotent. Given the time when our country was forged there was no health care system like there is now. No hospitals or HMO's. No insurance premiums.

Now to speak to the truth of today. What do you think happens when the poor cannot pay their hospital bills? Not only does it destroy their credit thus keeping them poor and on welfare, but it then will get reflected in health care premiums and costs going up not to mention government funding to keep hospitals operational.

Economically health care would be a boom as people would be able to get healthy and back to work. You know if there were jobs created to employee people.



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 10:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by User8911
I guess I really don't know American politics because from what I see in the OP, this is what I define as left side with socialism parts.

And you guys, you guys like it, wow for once.

I guess it might go downfall from here on since I said the S word...
edit on 9-6-2011 by User8911 because: (no reason given)


How is this socialism? Please, by all means, give a logical and clear reason as to why? Otherwise I would have to say you are simply just trying to discredit the movement.

Yes the "healthcare is a right" and "pro gay marriage" (while it I do not directly state that I am pro gay marriage just that as it stand marriage is discriminatory) are "leftist" ideas. This does not make them wrong. I differ from Democratic ideas when I say Health Care needs to be made available to those who can not afford it themselves and not mandatory for all. Those who do not wish to have do not need too.

My ideas are not perfect and they are open to debate and discussion from anyone within the movement. The idea is to get a platform most can get behind. Not everyone is always going to be happy but as long as we can get to the core of what people want I think we will be making headway.



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 10:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by LittleDragon
I have one problem with the whole thing I feel needs some pointing out ... the name and reputation. As pointed out in the OP, the party was known as "The People's Party". Have there been any such parties in other countries that have successfully avoided being viewed as Communist - or eventually becoming communist in their doctrine? Even if you kept the party from being viewed that way, or shifting towards it, you still need to compete against the registered Communist Party of America. Calling the revival the Populist Party needs some rethinking.


The Populist Party is in fact an homage in name to a party that was pro worker in 1891-1908. It has nothing to do with Communism. Will people use the name and whatever ideals they don't agree with to discredit this movement? Yes. That is one of the biggest issues I take with the current parties. As it stands now they care more about fighting with each other and parlaying their power into sex. They go on obviously bias TV networks to lend credence to the overwhelming vitriol they have for each other. It is much easier to talk about Wiener's indiscretions than it is to talk about cutting defense spending. Distraction and manipulation. All made possible by the fact there is no real challenge by a non co-opted party fighting for the rights of the people.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join