GOP turning "American helping American" into Socialism - Is that a national scandal?

[rdean]

Why should the people who put in a hard days work have to pay for people who are lazy. I am not talking about the disabled or the mentally ill or the elderly. yes we have to help those people. But families who sit on benefits for the whole life and don't even attempt to get a job is what I am complaining about!! Another thing that has to change is these anchor babies. An illegal can come over to this country 9 months pregnant, pop out a baby and that baby is "entitled" to our welfare system that same day!! But!! our wounded vets coming home from war have to wait up to 2 yrs for benefits they earned while overseas!! FIX this before we do anything for illegals !!

The GOP leadership has worked tirelessly to make their base believe American helping American is "socialism" and should be stopped. The very people helped by Social Security and Medicare believe getting government help is the road to disaster for this country. The GOP's misinformation techniques have worked so well, their base doesn't even understand that Medicare and Social Security are government programs and getting rid of government programs means disaster for them.

Republicans say we should look at Blue States to understand how all the welfare has hurt those states. Only the dollar drain from Blue States is going to Red States. The amount of money difference Red States receive from Blue States pales in comparison to what those in Blue States who are on welfare receive and is staggering.

If Red States were so self sufficient, they wouldn't be working overtime trying to lure Blue State workers to their states. They would train their own people. Only that would be (gasp) "socialism".

People don't want charity. Republicans insist they are better people because they imagine they give more to charity. Remember that story Paul Ryan plagiarized? About the little boy who did't want to be given school lunch? Well that's the thing. A little charity does nothing. Without the drain of money from Blue States to Red States, Blue States would have balanced budgets and would still be helping Blue State Citizens. It's because of that aid Blue States are able to give to their citizens that Red States are able to bleed money from those Blue States who earned it.

Perhaps we need some tough love and stop funding Red States. The only problem with that is the GOP leadership would simply let their middle class and poor die. We know that from the millions left off Medicare Expansion. That will probably cost 10,000 deaths a year in Red States.

Worrying about wounded vets? Only now? That started under Bush with the Iraq fiasco. Remember, Bush and the Republicans held both houses for nearly 6 years. They used reconciliation three times. Do you remember what they used it for? Democrats were powerless to stop them. And yet these problems started with them but are blamed on the Democrats. And Republicans block everything the Democrats try to do. And then the GOP cries "stop blaming us".

What have Republicans done for veterans? Block their jobs bills? Cut food stamps for disabled vets? Those aren't "help".

The question every right winger ignores is "why should Blue States keep funding Red States"? It's Red States who are the "moochers".

 

[zeke]

my gawd, we need to be saved not only from this government but by people in this country like rdean

the most despicable human being I've ever seen who doesn't care how many lies he make up about you the people who are Republican...

I've paid into welfare and SS for over 40 years now ...yet we still get accused of these disgusting lies BY people who are in the Democrat party and ALL FOR FUCKING politics and their AGENDAS
it's hard to admit some of our own fellow countrymen and women are our enemy, but here it is right before our eyes

You "paid into welfare" eh? How does that work? You mean you paid your Federal Income taxes? Well hell, you ought to get a medal. Right?

And why is it so hard to admit that fellow citizens are enemies. I see you work hard every day to make someone on here your enemy. And you are surprised? Why? You ought to be glad. Your strategy is working. You and I would definitely be enemies in person. So what?
You root for things that would be counter productive to me and my family. You think people like me will lay down and let that shit happen? No way. And if I make a few enemies defending my family, I can live with that. And not even bitch about it. Just life in America today.

 

[Grandma]

privatizing is not getting rid of

A voucher system is not Medicare. It's something else.

Besides, why won't these right wingers talk about the redistribution of wealth from Blue States to Red States?

privatization is still SS, it's not getting rid of it

Spoonman, you know better. Really, dude, you made me sad.

Privatizing Social Security takes it out of the government's hands. That means that a private company makes decisions for you and you can't vote that company out, you can't do anything. You have NO representation.

Further, the companies make money from the investments. They charge the SS accounts investment fees, plus with the amount of stock they can buy using every working American's money they can manipulate the stock market - cheat, in other words, and that's highly illegal.

But the biggest fail with privatization comes with the inevitable - within the next 40 years there will be another September 2008, another October 1929. Do you honestly think that level of risk is something old people should be forced into?

 

[Grandma]

States shouldn't "train" anyone. This is brought out by the liberal belief that college is the end all be all of everything. it's not.

It's embarrassing that someone in America would diss higher education.

People like that need to get out of the way of the 21st Century.

 

[Grandma]

privatization is still SS, it's not getting rid of it

Imagine if Social Security were part of the stock market during the last economic meltdown. What would be left?

More than they have now. Now SS is bankrupt. How many people who lost a bundle in the meltdown are multi millionaires today. And you keep complaining about how rich the Koch brothers are.

SS is not bankrupt, that's just a lie that no one believes, from the far right puppetmasters.

Name one person that lost everything 9/08 that's a multimillionaire now. I'm particularly interested in your finding one over the age of 65.

 

[Grandma]

Guns are protected as are indirect taxes. Income tax is a direct tax. Abolish all free trade agreements and return to using tariffs here in the US and you will see enough companies return here that jobs will return. Once the economy is back in place there will be plenty of charity to go around. As was the case in the early 20th century before the Great Depression.

That's exactly what they pushed for in 1929. The 1930s were simply wonderful because of tariffs..... right?

No, if you enact protectionist policies (high tariffs on imports), you will absolutely ruin this economy. Millions of jobs will be lost.

With high tariffs, yes. We don't have to get radical with protectionism. After 85 years' worth of assorted trade programs the government can see what does and does not work

 

[Grandma]

Yep, that's what most Democrats are today... actually they are now Progressive/commie lite/fascist and that's what they should be called..Democrats I voted for when I could first vote, thanks to my Democrat grandfather and I was young and dumb about politics back then.... are dead and gone...

I've never met a democrat that would give a nickle of his own money to help another.

Rdean believes charity starts in the pocket of another.

You must be a hermit.

And it's spelled n-i-c-k-e-l.

 

[rdean]

States shouldn't "train" anyone. This is brought out by the liberal belief that college is the end all be all of everything. it's not.

It's embarrassing that someone in America would diss higher education.

People like that need to get out of the way of the 21st Century.

Truly. I don't get it. This is where the GOP and business are parting ways. Republicans are afraid that immigrants will take their jobs. Business wants immigrants with degrees because they can't find the skills in Red States. So Republicans go to Blue States in an effort to entice skilled workers. How does this save Republican jobs?

Texas Gov. Rick Perry launches ad campaign to poach jobs from New York, Connecticut, California



Republicans are getting it from two sides. Immigrants with degrees and skilled workers from Blue States.

 

[Grandma]

Only in your twisted world is taking the property of others to control them "Americans helping Americans".

Americans help Americans without the government every day.

Really? When was the last time everyone with money in Kentucky helped out their poorer citizens in Coal Country?

Oh yeah, never.

That's the whole point of welfare, medicare, social security, and the ACA. If you knew anything about life in the 1960s you'd be furious at how the elderly were treated back then.

People are still being treated like shit. Without government intervention they would suffer and die - most of them children and the elderly.

Meanwhile, I've waited over a year to hear a single rightie speak out against corporate welfare. It's okay to subsidize billionaires, because ... why?

 

[rdean]

A voucher system is not Medicare. It's something else.

Besides, why won't these right wingers talk about the redistribution of wealth from Blue States to Red States?

privatization is still SS, it's not getting rid of it

Spoonman, you know better. Really, dude, you made me sad.

Privatizing Social Security takes it out of the government's hands. That means that a private company makes decisions for you and you can't vote that company out, you can't do anything. You have NO representation.

Further, the companies make money from the investments. They charge the SS accounts investment fees, plus with the amount of stock they can buy using every working American's money they can manipulate the stock market - cheat, in other words, and that's highly illegal.

But the biggest fail with privatization comes with the inevitable - within the next 40 years there will be another September 2008, another October 1929. Do you honestly think that level of risk is something old people should be forced into?

plutocracy noun \plü-ˈtä-krə-sē\

: government by the richest people

: a country that is ruled by the richest people

Plutocracy - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

That's the right wing goal. For some reason, Republicans trust corporations with a profit motive over the government we elect into office and at the same time screaming "we want freedom". Why? So they can give it away to corporations? At least with our government, you can vote people into and out of office. Once corporations are in charge, they will never let go. Only as long as we have a government we elect into office will we have even a sliver of freedom.

 

[Oldstyle]

Only in your twisted world is taking the property of others to control them "Americans helping Americans".

Americans help Americans without the government every day.

Really? When was the last time everyone with money in Kentucky helped out their poorer citizens in Coal Country?

Oh yeah, never.

That's the whole point of welfare, medicare, social security, and the ACA. If you knew anything about life in the 1960s you'd be furious at how the elderly were treated back then.

People are still being treated like shit. Without government intervention they would suffer and die - most of them children and the elderly.

Meanwhile, I've waited over a year to hear a single rightie speak out against corporate welfare. It's okay to subsidize billionaires, because ... why?

I keep hearing the same refrain from you, Grandma...yet if one looks long and hard at what fifty years of the "War on Poverty" has done for the poor in this country it becomes painfully obvious that all of those entitlement programs...all of the government interventions, if you will...haven't REALLY lessened the amount of poverty in this country!

Now I guess that you COULD continue down the same path...with ever increasing entitlements accompanied by ever increasing levels of debt...but at some point don't you think it might be prudent to actually do something to alleviate poverty?

 

[zeke]

privatization is still SS, it's not getting rid of it

Spoonman, you know better. Really, dude, you made me sad.

Privatizing Social Security takes it out of the government's hands. That means that a private company makes decisions for you and you can't vote that company out, you can't do anything. You have NO representation.

Further, the companies make money from the investments. They charge the SS accounts investment fees, plus with the amount of stock they can buy using every working American's money they can manipulate the stock market - cheat, in other words, and that's highly illegal.

But the biggest fail with privatization comes with the inevitable - within the next 40 years there will be another September 2008, another October 1929. Do you honestly think that level of risk is something old people should be forced into?

plutocracy noun \plü-ˈtä-krə-sē\

: government by the richest people

: a country that is ruled by the richest people

Plutocracy - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

That's the right wing goal. For some reason, Republicans trust corporations with a profit motive over the government we elect into office and at the same time screaming "we want freedom". Why? So they can give it away to corporations? At least with our government, you can vote people into and out of office. Once corporations are in charge, they will never let go. Only as long as we have a government we elect into office will we have even a sliver of freedom.

As you may have read, I am a big believer that we live in a plutocracy. Government of the rich, by the rich, for the rich.

But I never ever get a right wing wack job on here to contest that we live in a plutocracy.
Either they don't know what it is. Or they don't care. Or they agree and don't want to admit it. And I see no way to change it without a strong group of populists coming forward to bring about change. And that ain't happening. Liz Warren and Bernie can't do it by themselves.

But at least we live in a nice plutocracy. So far.

 

[Oldstyle]

I can only laugh at Deanie's fervent belief that Big Government...and more of it...is the solution to all our problems. I mean it's a nice "concept" until you look at what takes place when you put that much power and control in the hands of a small group of people in Washington DC.

 

[Stephanie]

Deanie's fervent belief that Big Government...and more of it...is the solution to all our problems

Unfortunately, a lot of people has bought that in this day and age...back in the day people had to be dying before they took from the government (their fellow countrymen and women, the taxpayers which is the money of government)..pride was a big reason and freedom to make their own way..
today they've been sold lies like deanies daily ...and really I think we are past the point of no return

 

[WelfareTick]

Imagine if Social Security were part of the stock market during the last economic meltdown. What would be left?

More than they have now. Now SS is bankrupt. How many people who lost a bundle in the meltdown are multi millionaires today. And you keep complaining about how rich the Koch brothers are.

SS is not bankrupt, that's just a lie that no one believes, from the far right puppetmasters.

Name one person that lost everything 9/08 that's a multimillionaire now. I'm particularly interested in your finding one over the age of 65.

That would be difficult, but only because no one "lost everything" in 9/08.

I have a friend who lost about half the value of his stock portfolio. However, now it's worth more than it ever was. He's a millionaire, by the way.

The value of your account in the SS trust fund is zero.

 

[WelfareTick]

Spoonman, you know better. Really, dude, you made me sad.

Privatizing Social Security takes it out of the government's hands. That means that a private company makes decisions for you and you can't vote that company out, you can't do anything. You have NO representation.

Further, the companies make money from the investments. They charge the SS accounts investment fees, plus with the amount of stock they can buy using every working American's money they can manipulate the stock market - cheat, in other words, and that's highly illegal.

But the biggest fail with privatization comes with the inevitable - within the next 40 years there will be another September 2008, another October 1929. Do you honestly think that level of risk is something old people should be forced into?

plutocracy noun \plü-ˈtä-krə-sē\

: government by the richest people

: a country that is ruled by the richest people

That's the right wing goal. For some reason, Republicans trust corporations with a profit motive over the government we elect into office and at the same time screaming "we want freedom". Why? So they can give it away to corporations? At least with our government, you can vote people into and out of office. Once corporations are in charge, they will never let go. Only as long as we have a government we elect into office will we have even a sliver of freedom.

As you may have read, I am a big believer that we live in a plutocracy. Government of the rich, by the rich, for the rich.

But I never ever get a right wing wack job on here to contest that we live in a plutocracy.
Either they don't know what it is. Or they don't care. Or they agree and don't want to admit it. And I see no way to change it without a strong group of populists coming forward to bring about change. And that ain't happening. Liz Warren and Bernie can't do it by themselves.

But at least we live in a nice plutocracy. So far.

The term is absolutely meaningless. Any country that has rich people could be labeled a "plutocracy." Dims like you throw it around because you think it makes you sound sophisticated and smart, and because it's a cheap shot at the rich. Can you name a single country that isn't ruled by rich people? Can you post a definition of the term that distinguishes countries that are plutocracies from those that aren't?

 

[WelfareTick]

States shouldn't "train" anyone. This is brought out by the liberal belief that college is the end all be all of everything. it's not.

It's embarrassing that someone in America would diss higher education.

People like that need to get out of the way of the 21st Century.

No one "disses" higher education. We dis government run brainwashing mills.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Dean is proof the far left don't believe in education or common sense.

fuck off

link?.....

 

[boilermaker55]

You, and this is my projection, are serious about what you posted. But your post conveys that you do no thinking beyond what you want to think about those under-employed by many employers. Read some statistics of the pay that workers at Walmart have, and I mention them because they are the countries largest employer now, and see what their employees are living on. Then check the cost of living index.
Maybe, just maybe, you might see a hint of what is happening and you could consider your post a bit more than when you first put it up.

Dems 2014: because there aren't enough people unemployed and on food stamps!

 

[rdean]

I can only laugh at Deanie's fervent belief that Big Government...and more of it...is the solution to all our problems. I mean it's a nice "concept" until you look at what takes place when you put that much power and control in the hands of a small group of people in Washington DC.

I laugh at it too because it's something I never said. It at that and I laugh at you, not with you, at you. Liars are funny. Especially when they get "caught". It's the total lack of expression.