Liberalism and Limitless Welfare: An Explanation.

[PoliticalChic]

Conservatives got more than they bargained for when they decided to destroy the American middle class.

What utter nonsense.

One can always see what Liberals are guilty of by what they claim the other side did....


"Incomes Have Dropped Twice as Much During the 'Recovery' as During the Recession
President Obama likes to talk about income inequality, but what matters far more is the actual income of the typical American. And how has the typical American household income fared on Obama's watch? Well, the economic "recovery" has now spanned an Olympiad, and during that time the typical American household income has not only dropped—it has dropped more than twice as much as it did during the recession.

... the real (inflation-adjusted) median annual household income in America has fallen by 4.4 percent during the "recovery," after having fallen by 1.8 during the recession. During the recession, the median American household income fell by $1,002 (from $55,480 to $54,478). During the recovery—that is, from the officially defined end of the recession (in June 2009) to the most recent month for which figures are available (June 2013)—the median American household income has fallen by $2,380 (from $54,478 to $52,098). So the typical American household is making almost $2,400 less per year (in constant 2013 dollars) than it was four years ago, when the Obama "recovery" began."
Incomes Have Dropped Twice as Much During the Recovery as During the Recession The Weekly Standard


You voted for this sad sack, huh?

That makes two of you.

And you think that would be different if McCain had been elected?

lol, good one.

No difference?

Then why didn't you vote for McCain?

Bet even you can't believe how stupid your posts are.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Conservatives got more than they bargained for when they decided to destroy the American middle class.

What utter nonsense.

One can always see what Liberals are guilty of by what they claim the other side did....


"Incomes Have Dropped Twice as Much During the 'Recovery' as During the Recession
President Obama likes to talk about income inequality, but what matters far more is the actual income of the typical American. And how has the typical American household income fared on Obama's watch? Well, the economic "recovery" has now spanned an Olympiad, and during that time the typical American household income has not only dropped—it has dropped more than twice as much as it did during the recession.

... the real (inflation-adjusted) median annual household income in America has fallen by 4.4 percent during the "recovery," after having fallen by 1.8 during the recession. During the recession, the median American household income fell by $1,002 (from $55,480 to $54,478). During the recovery—that is, from the officially defined end of the recession (in June 2009) to the most recent month for which figures are available (June 2013)—the median American household income has fallen by $2,380 (from $54,478 to $52,098). So the typical American household is making almost $2,400 less per year (in constant 2013 dollars) than it was four years ago, when the Obama "recovery" began."
Incomes Have Dropped Twice as Much During the Recovery as During the Recession The Weekly Standard


You voted for this sad sack, huh?

That makes two of you.

And you think that would be different if McCain had been elected?

lol, good one.

No difference?

Then why didn't you vote for McCain?

Bet even you can't believe how stupid your posts are.

You didn't answer the question, which isn't surprising, since you never take positions and defend them.

 

[eagle1462010]

The Chinese are doing what used to be our jobs for $300 a month.

Bring those jobs back here at 300 a month and the US worker would still get virtually every form of government assistance for the poor/low income American.

That is how free trade, another pillar of conservative economic policy, works.

As you deny the side of the equation and who supported and signed the same...........as Obama appoints a jobs czar who moves his business to China........

I've been against Free Trade since the beginning.................Our industries have been crushed as a result................and those leaving and taking there money overseas are shown the door by Dem policies of more overhead via Healthcare, higher taxation, more regs, and talk about sticking it to them..........

You want them to invest and create jobs here...........but then call them evil and say we should tax the living shit out of them............and then wonder why they leave...................You should be wearing your sign...........I'M STUPID because your very rhetoric and policies are anti-business. and your policies increase our prices like on Utilities as you mandate through the back door Cap and Trade causing prices to increase............

NYcariboooooooooo is the walking poster child of why businesses leave the U.S.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Conservatives got more than they bargained for when they decided to destroy the American middle class.

and here is the proof..........a scam artist electrician...........who will repeatedly tell you the problem is fixed only to see the fuse blow again................

Supporting a party that has added more to the welfare rolls and then saying they fixed it..................

Ignoring the underlying problem all together.

Americans with good paying jobs don't collect welfare.

Conservatism has tried to systemically drive down wages, weaken labor, and drive jobs out of this country for the benefit of the capitalists.

And they've been successful. Now you're reaping the whirlwind, because what conservatives never took into account is that the People, with the power of the ballot box, would take back much of what conservatives took away from them,

in the form of government help for the poor and low income Americans that conservatism created.

If it weren't for lies you'd be mute.

If you want to argue that conservatism isn't anti-labor, let's hear it.

If you want to argue that conservative free traders don't want capital to go to the area of cheapest labor, let's hear it.

If you want to argue that conservative economy/domestic/social policy is designed to widen the gap between richer and poorer at every opportunity, let's hear it.

Try to do it in your own thoughts.

Every single thing I post are my own thoughts, you moron.

Well then make any or all of the above arguments. Do it without quoting someone else's 'thoughts'.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Conservatives got more than they bargained for when they decided to destroy the American middle class.

and here is the proof..........a scam artist electrician...........who will repeatedly tell you the problem is fixed only to see the fuse blow again................

Supporting a party that has added more to the welfare rolls and then saying they fixed it..................

Ignoring the underlying problem all together.

Americans with good paying jobs don't collect welfare.

Conservatism has tried to systemically drive down wages, weaken labor, and drive jobs out of this country for the benefit of the capitalists.

And they've been successful. Now you're reaping the whirlwind, because what conservatives never took into account is that the People, with the power of the ballot box, would take back much of what conservatives took away from them,

in the form of government help for the poor and low income Americans that conservatism created.

If it weren't for lies you'd be mute.

If you want to argue that conservatism isn't anti-labor, let's hear it.

If you want to argue that conservative free traders don't want capital to go to the area of cheapest labor, let's hear it.

If you want to argue that conservative economy/domestic/social policy is designed to widen the gap between richer and poorer at every opportunity, let's hear it.

Try to do it in your own thoughts.

Every single thing I post are my own thoughts, you moron.

That's funny, given that your thread starts like this:

"William Voegeli spoke at Hillsdale College in October, analyzing why, with inordinate growth and very little in results of solving poverty, "liberals do not seem all that concerned about whether the machine they’ve built, and want to keep expanding, is running well..."

...I guess then this Voegeli is a pet name you given to some 'thoughts' in your own brain?

lol

 

[Rotagilla]

Conservatives got more than they bargained for when they decided to destroy the American middle class.

What utter nonsense.

One can always see what Liberals are guilty of by what they claim the other side did....


"Incomes Have Dropped Twice as Much During the 'Recovery' as During the Recession
President Obama likes to talk about income inequality, but what matters far more is the actual income of the typical American. And how has the typical American household income fared on Obama's watch? Well, the economic "recovery" has now spanned an Olympiad, and during that time the typical American household income has not only dropped—it has dropped more than twice as much as it did during the recession.

... the real (inflation-adjusted) median annual household income in America has fallen by 4.4 percent during the "recovery," after having fallen by 1.8 during the recession. During the recession, the median American household income fell by $1,002 (from $55,480 to $54,478). During the recovery—that is, from the officially defined end of the recession (in June 2009) to the most recent month for which figures are available (June 2013)—the median American household income has fallen by $2,380 (from $54,478 to $52,098). So the typical American household is making almost $2,400 less per year (in constant 2013 dollars) than it was four years ago, when the Obama "recovery" began."
Incomes Have Dropped Twice as Much During the Recovery as During the Recession The Weekly Standard


You voted for this sad sack, huh?

That makes two of you.

And you think that would be different if McCain had been elected?

lol, good one.

No difference?

Then why didn't you vote for McCain?

Bet even you can't believe how stupid your posts are.

You didn't answer the question, which isn't surprising, since you never take positions and defend them.

you keep changing the subject .....and then you tell people they didn't answer "the question".

 

[Claudette]

More logical for you perhaps.

Logic is not subjective.

You seem to think you understand liberals, when you're not one.

I was when I was young. You know the saying, "a young person who is not liberal has no heart; a mature person who is liberal has no brain".

Sure, the right get results. They get money in their pockets,

I'm with you so far...

...they get lower people killed, they get crime, they get all that they need for themselves to be better off and ef everyone else.

You lost me there. The right thinks people are responsible for their own well being. They think it's better to teach a man to fish than it is to give a man a fish. But the right is more generous with charitable giving than the left. The left is more generous with other peoples money.

What REALLY surprises me are the hangers on who don't benefit from the the Republican way and yet still vote for them, still deny the reality of the situation.

We don't always agree with who benefits. When I was younger and working, I believed that unemployment was a bad thing. When you apply for a job what do you say you were doing for the last 6 months? If unemployment wasn't available, you'd take any job for the time being. So unemployment is a short term benefit, but a long term liablity.

So, while the RICH are logical, the poorer Republicans are getting it right where the sun don't shine. And they're happy about it.

More rich are demonrat than republican. Demonrats don't care about America. I don't agree with half of what republicans stand for, but I do believe they care about America. Ronald Reagan was the first republican I supported, Jimmy "Peanut Brain" Carter was the last demonrat I supported.

Yup. Peanut Brain was the last Dem I voted for for POTUS as well. Worst mistake I ever made. Good God. What a moron he was.

Good post and spot on.

 

[Brucethethinker]

... ethics and the morality... HAPPY CUSTOMERS tell others...

I decided long ago to follow the ethical path. One reason for it is so you don't have to worry about running into someone you've screwed over. In the electrician example, he might get asked "aren't you the guy who caused a house to burn down?". That's how it's supposed to work. But some guys don't care about ethics, and keep moving and keep finding people to screw over.

 

[Brucethethinker]

"[Democrat] GOV. LAMM ASSERTS ELDERLY, IF VERY ILL, HAVE 'DUTY TO DIE'

Well don't they? This is a true story. My wealthy mother has 2 full time aides, 168 hours / week. That's 8 people. Suppose we have a government program that provides this kind of care for everyone. There aren't enough people to provide it. We have the means to keep the elderly alive much longer than we could in the past. Do we just think with our hearts and say everyone has a right to 2 full time aids 168 hours / week without calculating that that would mean? Or do we do the math first? That depends on what you think with, your heart or your brain.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I invite any of you to name the conservative economic policy initiatives that are designed specifically to make America's poor and low income individuals/families better off economically.

One initiative at a time, and be specific, please.

 

[PoliticalChic]

and here is the proof..........a scam artist electrician...........who will repeatedly tell you the problem is fixed only to see the fuse blow again................

Supporting a party that has added more to the welfare rolls and then saying they fixed it..................

Ignoring the underlying problem all together.

Americans with good paying jobs don't collect welfare.

Conservatism has tried to systemically drive down wages, weaken labor, and drive jobs out of this country for the benefit of the capitalists.

And they've been successful. Now you're reaping the whirlwind, because what conservatives never took into account is that the People, with the power of the ballot box, would take back much of what conservatives took away from them,

in the form of government help for the poor and low income Americans that conservatism created.

If it weren't for lies you'd be mute.

If you want to argue that conservatism isn't anti-labor, let's hear it.

If you want to argue that conservative free traders don't want capital to go to the area of cheapest labor, let's hear it.

If you want to argue that conservative economy/domestic/social policy is designed to widen the gap between richer and poorer at every opportunity, let's hear it.

Try to do it in your own thoughts.

Every single thing I post are my own thoughts, you moron.

Well then make any or all of the above arguments. Do it without quoting someone else's 'thoughts'.

The most amusing post of the day!

You....fantasizing that you could dictate what I do.

Mind your betters

 

[eagle1462010]

I invite any of you to name the conservative economic policy initiatives that are designed specifically to make America's poor and low income individuals/families better off economically.

One initiative at a time, and be specific, please.

It goes off topic on this thread...............and would derail the main purpose of welfare on this thread.

These areas have been discussed on many threads and many times...................Your typical rhetoric doesn't fix a damn thing.

 

[PoliticalChic]

6. [Sadly, the truth is] "liberals are not especially troubled if government dollars that could help poor people are squandered—

....liberals are people who:
a) have built a welfare state that is now the biggest thing government does in America; and

b) want to regard themselves and be regarded by others as compassionate empathizers determined to alleviate suffering, it should follow that nothing would preoccupy them more than making sure the welfare state machine is functioning at maximum efficiency. When it isn’t, after all, the sacred mission of alleviating preventable suffering is inevitably degraded.




7. In fact, however, liberals do not seem all that concerned about whether the machine they’ve built, and want to keep expanding, is running well.

a. For inflation-adjusted, per capita federal welfare state spending to increase by 254 percent from 1977 to 2013, without a correspondingly dramatic reduction in poverty, and for liberals to react to this phenomenon by taking the position that our welfare state’s only real defect is that it is insufficiently generous, rather than insufficiently effective, suggests a basic problem."
Current Issue

 

[NYcarbineer]

I invite any of you to name the conservative economic policy initiatives that are designed specifically to make America's poor and low income individuals/families better off economically.

One initiative at a time, and be specific, please.

It goes off topic on this thread...............and would derail the main purpose of welfare on this thread.

These areas have been discussed on many threads and many times...................Your typical rhetoric doesn't fix a damn thing.

That's because you can't name anything. The topic of this thread is a political attack on LIBERAL policy towards the poor,

which includes within it the implication that conservative policy is not only distinctively different,

but better.

And yet, in NONE of these repeated threads (and they're all the same) by the OP, do any conservatives ever advance better ideas for making America's poor and low income citizens better off.

Now why do you suppose that is? I would think that if conservatives had any good ideas about reducing poverty or attracting good paying jobs,

they wouldn't be able to shut up about it.

And yet, you're silent on the subject.

 

[Freemason9]

American liberalism, based upon the welfare state, merely uses welfare payments as an alternative to prison. There is no American effort to actually eliminate poverty through job creation and better labor laws.

In that respect, American "liberals," "conservatives," and corporatists are exactly on the same page.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Americans with good paying jobs don't collect welfare.

Conservatism has tried to systemically drive down wages, weaken labor, and drive jobs out of this country for the benefit of the capitalists.

And they've been successful. Now you're reaping the whirlwind, because what conservatives never took into account is that the People, with the power of the ballot box, would take back much of what conservatives took away from them,

in the form of government help for the poor and low income Americans that conservatism created.

If it weren't for lies you'd be mute.

If you want to argue that conservatism isn't anti-labor, let's hear it.

If you want to argue that conservative free traders don't want capital to go to the area of cheapest labor, let's hear it.

If you want to argue that conservative economy/domestic/social policy is designed to widen the gap between richer and poorer at every opportunity, let's hear it.

Try to do it in your own thoughts.

Every single thing I post are my own thoughts, you moron.

Well then make any or all of the above arguments. Do it without quoting someone else's 'thoughts'.

The most amusing post of the day!

You....fantasizing that you could dictate what I do.

Mind your betters

You see? PC has started dozens of threads bitching about the welfare state, and yet doesn't have a single good idea on how to alternatively make the poor better off, or low income Americans better off.

That's because conservatism as an economic set of beliefs doesn't even attempt to solve those problems, and PC is a blind follower of conservatism.

 

[NYcarbineer]

American liberalism, based upon the welfare state, merely uses welfare payments as an alternative to prison. There is no American effort to actually eliminate poverty through job creation and better labor laws.

In that respect, American "liberals," "conservatives," and corporatists are exactly on the same page.

How do you create good paying jobs in America when the system allows the existing good paying jobs to fly out of this country by the tens of thousands?

Conservatism can't fix that. Conservatism wants the jobs to go to the lowest wages. That's a core value of the free market that most conservatives are ideologically bound to.

 

[Brucethethinker]

One initiative at a time, and be specific, please.

Repeal of Obomacare.
Conservatism isn't really about initiatives, it's about slowing down the constant drift to the left. Liberal programs are created, they fail, so they're doubled in size. Repeal of unemployment insurance, repeal of the minimum wage, repeal of OSHA and the EPA, these are all initiatives designed to help the economic condition of the poor in the long run. Conservative initiatives aren't designed to provide short-term election-winning results like liberal programs are. So there aren't many conservative initiatives designed to provide short-term (and necessarily temporary) improvement for the economic condition of the poor. Unlike liberal initiatives, they're designed to actually work.

 

[NYcarbineer]

One initiative at a time, and be specific, please.

Repeal of Obomacare.
Conservatism isn't really about initiatives, it's about slowing down the constant drift to the left. Liberal programs are created, they fail, so they're doubled in size. Repeal of unemployment insurance, repeal of the minimum wage, repeal of OSHA and the EPA, these are all initiatives designed to help the economic condition of the poor in the long run. Conservative initiatives aren't designed to provide short-term election-winning results like liberal programs are. So there aren't many conservative initiatives designed to provide short-term (and necessarily temporary) improvement for the economic condition of the poor. Unlike liberal initiatives, they're designed to actually work.

"Repeal of unemployment insurance, repeal of the minimum wage, repeal of OSHA and the EPA, these are all initiatives designed to help the economic condition of the poor in the long run."

Really? Repeal of everything of that nature would take us back to the 19th century early Industrial Revolution days.

Do you need to be reminded what conditions were like among the working classes back then?

 

[Brucethethinker]

Really? Repeal of everything of that nature would take us back to the 19th century early Industrial Revolution days.

Do you need to be reminded what conditions were like among the working classes back then?

I didn't say I was in favor of these initiatives. You asked for a conservative initiative designed to help the economic status of the poor, and I gave you many. The government passes laws making employment illegal in many situations. These laws might (or might not) benefit the poor. I claim they almost never benefit the poor.