Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yes, the good ole days before FDR
Rampant poverty, dust bowls, soup lines, massive migrations looking for work. Every man for himself
A libertarian dream
Yep, the good ol' days AFTER FDR
Rampant poverty, dust bowls, soup lines, massive migrations looking for work. Every man for himself, gargantuan welfare/warfare police state
A socialist/fascist dream.
.
If looking out for fellow Americans is your view of socialism/fascism......maybe it is not so bad
GOOGLE TRANSLATION:
FORCING TAXPAYERS AND PRODUCERS TO FINANCIALLY SUPPORT ME IS A GOOD THING . I HOPE IT LASTS. LONG LIVE COMRADE SANDERS
Taxpayers are not forced. Our tax structure is established by legislators elected by We the People
GOOGLE TRANSLATION
50% OF THE ELECTORATE BELONG TO THE SLAVE PARTY - THE DEMOPUBLICANS - IF POLITICIANS WANT TO BE "ELECTABLE" THEY HAVE TO GRANDSTAND TO "WE THE PARASITES"
.
Taxation is not theftLOL, what an ignorant rebuttal, since when does theft become moral simply because "the majority" voted for it? If you take the property of a peaceful citizen against their will it's called theft and no amount of voting will ever make it moral.Taxpayers are not forced. Our tax structure is established by legislators elected by We the People
If the majority votes to take your house away from you and give it to somebody it deems more deserving would you call that moral ? Of course you wouldn't because you would be the direct victim of the theft, but you're perfectly okay if government force is utilized against some other peaceful citizen as long as you agree with the governments purported purpose of said theft.
Of course you'd understand that concept if you actually had a grasp on morality but since you obviously don't I expect it'll fly right over your head.
Sorry; that is not the case regarding our social safety nets in one of the richest economies in the world.Err..ummm.. the limits placed on our "social safety nets" are not a product of "the Right" they are a product of the fact that resources are not infinite and that due to everybody and their brother having their hand out for federal subsidies only (last I looked) 18 cents of every subsidy dollar goes toward helping those that are poor. We have a welfare state that is primarily serving the needs of the NOT POOR because buying votes from the poor is far less efficient than buying the votes of the not poor.What rampant poverty in the US? You mean the one the Right creates by putting limits on our social safety nets? Or, how the Right complains about how the least wealthy in the US may obtain steak and lobster on their EBT cards?
Of course neither major party is even remotely interested in changing this situation since they both derive enormous benefits from it.
Yep, the good ol' days AFTER FDR
Rampant poverty, dust bowls, soup lines, massive migrations looking for work. Every man for himself, gargantuan welfare/warfare police state
A socialist/fascist dream.
.
If looking out for fellow Americans is your view of socialism/fascism......maybe it is not so bad
GOOGLE TRANSLATION:
FORCING TAXPAYERS AND PRODUCERS TO FINANCIALLY SUPPORT ME IS A GOOD THING . I HOPE IT LASTS. LONG LIVE COMRADE SANDERS
Taxpayers are not forced. Our tax structure is established by legislators elected by We the People
GOOGLE TRANSLATION
50% OF THE ELECTORATE BELONG TO THE SLAVE PARTY - THE DEMOPUBLICANS - IF POLITICIANS WANT TO BE "ELECTABLE" THEY HAVE TO GRANDSTAND TO "WE THE PARASITES"
.
Oh yes......free stuff
Yet all the candidates seem to buddy up to an ultra wealthy benefactor who dictates exactly what he wants and how much free stuff he will tolerate
<whispers>If looking out for fellow Americans is your view of socialism/fascism......maybe it is not so bad
GOOGLE TRANSLATION:
FORCING TAXPAYERS AND PRODUCERS TO FINANCIALLY SUPPORT ME IS A GOOD THING . I HOPE IT LASTS. LONG LIVE COMRADE SANDERS
Taxpayers are not forced. Our tax structure is established by legislators elected by We the People
GOOGLE TRANSLATION
50% OF THE ELECTORATE BELONG TO THE SLAVE PARTY - THE DEMOPUBLICANS - IF POLITICIANS WANT TO BE "ELECTABLE" THEY HAVE TO GRANDSTAND TO "WE THE PARASITES"
.
Oh yes......free stuff
Yet all the candidates seem to buddy up to an ultra wealthy benefactor who dictates exactly what he wants and how much free stuff he will tolerate
DINGLE BERRY
WHICH OF THE DEMOPUBLICAN POLITICIANS IS PLEDGING TO ABOLISH THE GARGANTUAN WELFARE/WARFARE POLICE STATE?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
NONE
Taxation is not theftLOL, what an ignorant rebuttal, since when does theft become moral simply because "the majority" voted for it? If you take the property of a peaceful citizen against their will it's called theft and no amount of voting will ever make it moral.Taxpayers are not forced. Our tax structure is established by legislators elected by We the People
If the majority votes to take your house away from you and give it to somebody it deems more deserving would you call that moral ? Of course you wouldn't because you would be the direct victim of the theft, but you're perfectly okay if government force is utilized against some other peaceful citizen as long as you agree with the governments purported purpose of said theft.
Of course you'd understand that concept if you actually had a grasp on morality but since you obviously don't I expect it'll fly right over your head.
It is the price you pay to belong to a free society
<whispers>GOOGLE TRANSLATION:
FORCING TAXPAYERS AND PRODUCERS TO FINANCIALLY SUPPORT ME IS A GOOD THING . I HOPE IT LASTS. LONG LIVE COMRADE SANDERS
Taxpayers are not forced. Our tax structure is established by legislators elected by We the People
GOOGLE TRANSLATION
50% OF THE ELECTORATE BELONG TO THE SLAVE PARTY - THE DEMOPUBLICANS - IF POLITICIANS WANT TO BE "ELECTABLE" THEY HAVE TO GRANDSTAND TO "WE THE PARASITES"
.
Oh yes......free stuff
Yet all the candidates seem to buddy up to an ultra wealthy benefactor who dictates exactly what he wants and how much free stuff he will tolerate
DINGLE BERRY
WHICH OF THE DEMOPUBLICAN POLITICIANS IS PLEDGING TO ABOLISH THE GARGANTUAN WELFARE/WARFARE POLICE STATE?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
NONE
inside voice
Yes our tyrannical Gubmint using force against our beleaguered massesTaxation is not theftLOL, what an ignorant rebuttal, since when does theft become moral simply because "the majority" voted for it? If you take the property of a peaceful citizen against their will it's called theft and no amount of voting will ever make it moral.Taxpayers are not forced. Our tax structure is established by legislators elected by We the People
If the majority votes to take your house away from you and give it to somebody it deems more deserving would you call that moral ? Of course you wouldn't because you would be the direct victim of the theft, but you're perfectly okay if government force is utilized against some other peaceful citizen as long as you agree with the governments purported purpose of said theft.
Of course you'd understand that concept if you actually had a grasp on morality but since you obviously don't I expect it'll fly right over your head.
It is the price you pay to belong to a free society
LOL, As I expected you have no grasp on the concept of the morality therefore you continue with your weak attempts to justify immorality. You don't seem to get that
a.) A "free society" cannot exist in an environment where government initiates force against peaceful citizens
b.) Our current system of taxation isn't a price tag since it's not uniform, bi-directional, voluntary nor quantifying any specific value proposition.
Now, would it be possible for you to post something OTHER than bumper sticker slogans? Isn't there some small part of your brain that is still capable of independent thought or did you sell the entire thing to Democrats?
<whispers>Taxpayers are not forced. Our tax structure is established by legislators elected by We the People
GOOGLE TRANSLATION
50% OF THE ELECTORATE BELONG TO THE SLAVE PARTY - THE DEMOPUBLICANS - IF POLITICIANS WANT TO BE "ELECTABLE" THEY HAVE TO GRANDSTAND TO "WE THE PARASITES"
.
Oh yes......free stuff
Yet all the candidates seem to buddy up to an ultra wealthy benefactor who dictates exactly what he wants and how much free stuff he will tolerate
DINGLE BERRY
WHICH OF THE DEMOPUBLICAN POLITICIANS IS PLEDGING TO ABOLISH THE GARGANTUAN WELFARE/WARFARE POLICE STATE?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
NONE
inside voice
THE ONLY ONES THAT LIKE TO WHISPER ARE THE MAFIOSO/SNEAKY TYPES -
THOSE WHO BELIEVE THAT THE TAXATION IMPOSED BY THE GARGANTUAN WELFARE/WARFARE POLICE STATE IS NOT THEFT.
.
Taxation is not theftLOL, what an ignorant rebuttal, since when does theft become moral simply because "the majority" voted for it? If you take the property of a peaceful citizen against their will it's called theft and no amount of voting will ever make it moral.Taxpayers are not forced. Our tax structure is established by legislators elected by We the People
If the majority votes to take your house away from you and give it to somebody it deems more deserving would you call that moral ? Of course you wouldn't because you would be the direct victim of the theft, but you're perfectly okay if government force is utilized against some other peaceful citizen as long as you agree with the governments purported purpose of said theft.
Of course you'd understand that concept if you actually had a grasp on morality but since you obviously don't I expect it'll fly right over your head.
It is the price you pay to belong to a free society
Only a moron would expect those in poverty to pay the same as the mega wealthy
The mega wealthy pay taxes?
Again with the Pavlovian responses, it's clear you lack the will and/or ability to address any subject beyond simplistic partisan sloganeering.Yes our tyrannical Gubmint using force against our beleaguered masses
No only a moron would compare it to a price tag, which is exactly what you did earlier not surprising though since you have no idea how the price mechanism works and what prices actually represent.No taxation is not uniform. Only a moron would expect those in poverty to pay the same as the mega wealthy
Again with the Pavlovian responses, it's clear you lack the will and/or ability to address any subject beyond simplistic partisan sloganeering.Yes our tyrannical Gubmint using force against our beleaguered masses
No only a moron would compare it to a price tag, which is exactly what you did earlier not surprising though since you have no idea how the price mechanism works and what prices actually represent.No taxation is not uniform. Only a moron would expect those in poverty to pay the same as the mega wealthy
Ciao
Who cares what you believe.I don't get people who say they want smaller government.
Mainly because I don't believe they want smaller government.
Most of the people who advocate smaller government are the sort of people who support the US having a massive armed forces. They're the sort of people who want the government to ban same sex marriage. They're the sort of people who want the govt to ban drugs like Marijuana, perhaps even alcohol.
In other words, they're people who want the government in YOUR face, just not in their face. They're happy for big government, just so long as it doesn't step on their patch. They're not gay, they're not into recreational drugs, they're not getting invaded by the US armed forces, so they just don't care and they're happy for big government in those areas.
Also, I've been discussing government subsidies. Yes, we all know about welfare (for your information, before you jump on my back about it, I'm in favor of welfare based on how long you have worked, and before you've worked for 5 years you should get no welfare at all unless you're in education and doing well in your education at that, and then the longer you've worked, the more you can get, like after 10 years an increase in payments, if you need them) and the left giving money to people who really shouldn't be getting it, but this isn't what's been spoken about here, so lay off this topic.
Government subsidies to farmer and big corporations. Seem the right is all in favor of handing out money to rich people. Seems strange to talk about smaller govt one minute, then advocate govt giving out loads of money to businesses the next minute.
Does anyone actually, really, truly, support smaller government?
Who cares what you believe.I don't get people who say they want smaller government.
Mainly because I don't believe they want smaller government.
Most of the people who advocate smaller government are the sort of people who support the US having a massive armed forces. They're the sort of people who want the government to ban same sex marriage. They're the sort of people who want the govt to ban drugs like Marijuana, perhaps even alcohol.
In other words, they're people who want the government in YOUR face, just not in their face. They're happy for big government, just so long as it doesn't step on their patch. They're not gay, they're not into recreational drugs, they're not getting invaded by the US armed forces, so they just don't care and they're happy for big government in those areas.
Also, I've been discussing government subsidies. Yes, we all know about welfare (for your information, before you jump on my back about it, I'm in favor of welfare based on how long you have worked, and before you've worked for 5 years you should get no welfare at all unless you're in education and doing well in your education at that, and then the longer you've worked, the more you can get, like after 10 years an increase in payments, if you need them) and the left giving money to people who really shouldn't be getting it, but this isn't what's been spoken about here, so lay off this topic.
Government subsidies to farmer and big corporations. Seem the right is all in favor of handing out money to rich people. Seems strange to talk about smaller govt one minute, then advocate govt giving out loads of money to businesses the next minute.
Does anyone actually, really, truly, support smaller government?
Government, especially the federal government is out of control.
The deficit exceeds the net wealth of the entire country.
Then why don't you vote Libertarian?...I don't get people who say they want smaller government.
Mainly because I don't believe they want smaller government.
Most of the people who advocate smaller government are the sort of people who support the US having a massive armed forces. They're the sort of people who want the government to ban same sex marriage. They're the sort of people who want the govt to ban drugs like Marijuana, perhaps even alcohol.
In other words, they're people who want the government in YOUR face, just not in their face. They're happy for big government, just so long as it doesn't step on their patch. They're not gay, they're not into recreational drugs, they're not getting invaded by the US armed forces, so they just don't care and they're happy for big government in those areas.
Also, I've been discussing government subsidies. Yes, we all know about welfare (for your information, before you jump on my back about it, I'm in favor of welfare based on how long you have worked, and before you've worked for 5 years you should get no welfare at all unless you're in education and doing well in your education at that, and then the longer you've worked, the more you can get, like after 10 years an increase in payments, if you need them) and the left giving money to people who really shouldn't be getting it, but this isn't what's been spoken about here, so lay off this topic.
Government subsidies to farmer and big corporations. Seem the right is all in favor of handing out money to rich people. Seems strange to talk about smaller govt one minute, then advocate govt giving out loads of money to businesses the next minute.
Does anyone actually, really, truly, support smaller government?
That has never been the governments main dutyThe govts main duty is the protection of its citizens. First and foremost and no that doesn't mean never ending spending or wars. It's too bad that you can't be that honest on all of the worthless social programs that do nothing for the citizens.
Social Programs do more for our citizens than the military does
You're an imbecile. Social programs didn't exist before FDR, so how can you say that protecting citizens was not the government's main duty?
Yes, the good ole days before FDR
Rampant poverty, dust bowls, soup lines, massive migrations looking for work. Every man for himself
A libertarian dream
Yep, the good ol' days AFTER FDR
Rampant poverty, dust bowls, soup lines, massive migrations looking for work. Every man for himself, gargantuan welfare/warfare police state
A socialist/fascist dream.
.
If looking out for fellow Americans is your view of socialism/fascism......maybe it is not so bad
You make lots of assumptions.Can’t agree with this post in its entirety, but the fundamental premise of the thread is correct.I don't get people who say they want smaller government.
Mainly because I don't believe they want smaller government.
Most of the people who advocate smaller government are the sort of people who support the US having a massive armed forces. They're the sort of people who want the government to ban same sex marriage. They're the sort of people who want the govt to ban drugs like Marijuana, perhaps even alcohol.
In other words, they're people who want the government in YOUR face, just not in their face. They're happy for big government, just so long as it doesn't step on their patch. They're not gay, they're not into recreational drugs, they're not getting invaded by the US armed forces, so they just don't care and they're happy for big government in those areas.
Also, I've been discussing government subsidies. Yes, we all know about welfare (for your information, before you jump on my back about it, I'm in favor of welfare based on how long you have worked, and before you've worked for 5 years you should get no welfare at all unless you're in education and doing well in your education at that, and then the longer you've worked, the more you can get, like after 10 years an increase in payments, if you need them) and the left giving money to people who really shouldn't be getting it, but this isn't what's been spoken about here, so lay off this topic.
Government subsidies to farmer and big corporations. Seem the right is all in favor of handing out money to rich people. Seems strange to talk about smaller govt one minute, then advocate govt giving out loads of money to businesses the next minute.
Does anyone actually, really, truly, support smaller government?
Conservatives – the social right in particular – have no interest in ‘less’ or ‘smaller’ government; indeed, many on the right seek to increase the size and authority of government at the expense of individual liberty.
You're an imbecile. Social programs didn't exist before FDR, so how can you say that protecting citizens was not the government's main duty?
Yes, the good ole days before FDR
Rampant poverty, dust bowls, soup lines, massive migrations looking for work. Every man for himself
A libertarian dream
Yep, the good ol' days AFTER FDR
Rampant poverty, dust bowls, soup lines, massive migrations looking for work. Every man for himself, gargantuan welfare/warfare police state
A socialist/fascist dream.
.
If looking out for fellow Americans is your view of socialism/fascism......maybe it is not so bad
GOOGLE TRANSLATION:
FORCING TAXPAYERS AND PRODUCERS TO FINANCIALLY SUPPORT ME IS A GOOD THING . I HOPE IT LASTS. LONG LIVE COMRADE SANDERS
Taxpayers are not forced. Our tax structure is established by legislators elected by We the People
