The hilarious difference between Republican "free stuff" and Democratic "free stuff"

[Vandalshandle]

One percent of the world's population owns 50% of the world's wealth.

Kind of like things were in France before 1789.

 

[ninja007]

No, actually the dems have been giving away free stuff since lbj's great society and fdr's sponge programs and our country has gotten progressively worse in terms of debt, education, homeless, poverty etc.

that's the TRUE difference right there. but to a progressive like redeani, if we aren't putting more dept on the backs of our Great Grandchildren then they'll post threads like this

Their only objective is class warfare. They could really care less about the downtrodden.

exactly, they only care about the poor when they can use them to beat up a Republican. If they cared about people they wouldn't support abortion, the killings of 58Million unborn human beings and counting.

libs dont give a shit about anyone but themselves. Repeating the lie they give a shit gets old.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Have you noticed, when Democrats talk about helping the middle class and poor, they bring up education, daycare, school lunches, health care, infrastructure and so on? Typically revolving around learning and building. Republicans call all that "free stuff" in voices dripping with scorn and derision.

When Republicans talk about helping the middle class and poor, they talk about cutting food stamps and welfare for the poor, which will make them work. They talk about cutting corporate taxes re eliminating them altogether. They talk about tax cuts for the wealthy because they are the job creators and they want to block immigrants from coming here because immigrants will take their minimum wage, low skills job.

I wonder which actually costs the country more, helping the middle class rebuild the country or shoveling money to the wealthy? And I wonder why subsidies and not paying tax isn't "free stuff"? Seems what Republicans are doing costs even more.

I thought you'd talk about farming subsidies.

Rich people say they shouldn't have to pay more taxes, because they made their own money, they didn't get help from the government. Well, in agriculture this clearly isn't the case. They get billions (about $20 billion) in subsidies, as you can see from the chart above.

Not only this but these farmers claim to be poor. Because they don't EARN their money, they don't get classified as earning money, and therefore their kids get free college education and other such things.

This free money is supported by the Republicans.

Bush and Walker's Iowa Teams Harvest Millions in Farm Subsidies

Bush goes out and tells farmers he wouldn't touch their subsidies, gets their votes, gets campaign money too.

Walker does the same.

Ten Examples of Welfare for the Rich and Corporations

"
Ten Examples of Welfare for the Rich and Corporations"

Here you can read other free money from the right to the rich.

 

[frigidweirdo]

No, actually the dems have been giving away free stuff since lbj's great society and fdr's sponge programs and our country has gotten progressively worse in terms of debt, education, homeless, poverty etc.

that's the TRUE difference right there. but to a progressive like redeani, if we aren't putting more dept on the backs of our Great Grandchildren then they'll post threads like this

Their only objective is class warfare. They could really care less about the downtrodden.

exactly, they only care about the poor when they can use them to beat up a Republican. If they cared about people they wouldn't support abortion, the killings of 58Million unborn human beings and counting.

So, an unmarried 16 year old has a baby, without a support network to help her, and you think everyone is better off without abortions huh? The baby will grow up to spend most of its life in prison after murdering someone. Of, well the murder was probably for the best then, hey?

 

[francoHFW]

Before Roe, 5000 women a year died from botched abortions. Moron dupes.

 

[Arianrhod]

the interstate highway act was signed into law by Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower.

Yep, and you're driving on it, even though your grandparents paid for it. Moocher.

Wow, you're stupid.

You're saying you built the interstates? Didn't realize you were that old. So old you apparently forgot to answer the rest of my post.

 

[francoHFW]

72% of women who have abortions already have at least one child. Moron dupes. Thank god for O-Care and free birth control. ACTUALLY, better than free, dupes. Saves EVERYONE money.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Have you noticed, when Democrats talk about helping the middle class and poor, they bring up education, daycare, school lunches, health care, infrastructure and so on? Typically revolving around learning and building. Republicans call all that "free stuff" in voices dripping with scorn and derision.

When Republicans talk about helping the middle class and poor, they talk about cutting food stamps and welfare for the poor, which will make them work. They talk about cutting corporate taxes re eliminating them altogether. They talk about tax cuts for the wealthy because they are the job creators and they want to block immigrants from coming here because immigrants will take their minimum wage, low skills job.

I wonder which actually costs the country more, helping the middle class rebuild the country or shoveling money to the wealthy? And I wonder why subsidies and not paying tax isn't "free stuff"? Seems what Republicans are doing costs even more.

Since most of the righties on this site are "conservatives" rather than Republicans your post is moot. Stop ALL the free shit.

/thread

 

[Arianrhod]

Have you noticed, when Democrats talk about helping the middle class and poor, they bring up education, daycare, school lunches, health care, infrastructure and so on? Typically revolving around learning and building. Republicans call all that "free stuff" in voices dripping with scorn and derision.

When Republicans talk about helping the middle class and poor, they talk about cutting food stamps and welfare for the poor, which will make them work. They talk about cutting corporate taxes re eliminating them altogether. They talk about tax cuts for the wealthy because they are the job creators and they want to block immigrants from coming here because immigrants will take their minimum wage, low skills job.

I wonder which actually costs the country more, helping the middle class rebuild the country or shoveling money to the wealthy? And I wonder why subsidies and not paying tax isn't "free stuff"? Seems what Republicans are doing costs even more.

Since most of the righties on this site are "conservatives" rather than Republicans your post is moot. Stop ALL the free shit.

/thread

To hell with Eisenhower and Reagan, right? And no more Ben Carsons! Let 'em eat cake!

 

[frigidweirdo]

Have you noticed, when Democrats talk about helping the middle class and poor, they bring up education, daycare, school lunches, health care, infrastructure and so on? Typically revolving around learning and building. Republicans call all that "free stuff" in voices dripping with scorn and derision.

When Republicans talk about helping the middle class and poor, they talk about cutting food stamps and welfare for the poor, which will make them work. They talk about cutting corporate taxes re eliminating them altogether. They talk about tax cuts for the wealthy because they are the job creators and they want to block immigrants from coming here because immigrants will take their minimum wage, low skills job.

I wonder which actually costs the country more, helping the middle class rebuild the country or shoveling money to the wealthy? And I wonder why subsidies and not paying tax isn't "free stuff"? Seems what Republicans are doing costs even more.

Since most of the righties on this site are "conservatives" rather than Republicans your post is moot. Stop ALL the free shit.

/thread

Left wingers are democrats but right wingers aren't Republicans. What?

 

[BluesLegend]

Democrat voters are nothing if not dumb ass naïve idiots. Does the money ever get to the poor? No, it gets sucked up by Democrat public employee unions who kick part of the money back to Democrat politicians. Obama gave over $1 billion dollars of stimulus money to Baltimore, guess how much the poor got for jobs training...wait for it...yeah $3 million. Libs seriously, get a brain already.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Have you noticed, when Democrats talk about helping the middle class and poor, they bring up education, daycare, school lunches, health care, infrastructure and so on? Typically revolving around learning and building. Republicans call all that "free stuff" in voices dripping with scorn and derision.

When Republicans talk about helping the middle class and poor, they talk about cutting food stamps and welfare for the poor, which will make them work. They talk about cutting corporate taxes re eliminating them altogether. They talk about tax cuts for the wealthy because they are the job creators and they want to block immigrants from coming here because immigrants will take their minimum wage, low skills job.

I wonder which actually costs the country more, helping the middle class rebuild the country or shoveling money to the wealthy? And I wonder why subsidies and not paying tax isn't "free stuff"? Seems what Republicans are doing costs even more.

Since most of the righties on this site are "conservatives" rather than Republicans your post is moot. Stop ALL the free shit.

/thread

Left wingers are democrats but right wingers aren't Republicans. What?

Did I say that? Nope, YOU did.

Learn to read stupidfuck

 

[Political Junky]

So. . . . let me get this straight. You think keeping your own money is. . . . .free stuff? Is that your argument?

Lol is that how you feel about oil subsidies? Tell me, if you use government services like highways, shouldn't you pay the tax for them?

My company doesn't receive any oil subsidies. Could you point to where I could get some though? I would greatly appreciate it.

OH, you want free stuff?

 

[Rustic]

They ain't free but, buy more guns and ammo...

 

[Londoner]

So. . . . let me get this straight. You think keeping your own money is. . . . .free stuff? Is that your argument?

No. We think that Exxon's current tax burden, after its subsidies are factored in, does not come close to paying for the military protection of its mideast oil fields. We think decades of concentrated lobbying has resulted in large sections of the corporate sector as net takers- especially when you price in all the subsidies, bailouts, legal protections (including nanny state Patent protection where uncle sucker builds a monopoly fence around your investments), the satellite system, transportation, water systems, energy grids, etc, = advanced industrial infrastructure. And we won't even talk about the military stabilization of the globe so that our largest corporations can have access to all the world's natural resources and labor markets. It would be one thing if you could itemize a tenth of the shit profit-makers get from government, but you can't. You live inside simple cliches about "keeping your own money".

Fucking Boeing started as an appendage of the the Pentagon Budget, which invested heavily in aerospace technology long before it was profitable - then, once profitable, it was simply handed to the private sector. [Socialize the cost, privatize the profit, and get Talk Radio to cover up the welfare upon which so much profit depends.]

Huge portions of the 80s consumer electronics boom came out of the technological advances made under the NASA & Pentagon budgets. [Yup Bevis, landing on the moon and fighting a modern war requires ultra sophisticated technology - technology that finds its way into the private sector where it becomes a gold mine] Problem is: the technology and infrastructure and legal system needs to be paid for before its your money - but you have no knowledge of what the private sector gets from the state or why they've built lobbying empires in Washington DC . . . (so they can descend like locusts on the taxpayer's wallet. OR . . . do you think corporations pump trillions into our political system for fun? You really think our biggest/smartest market players would spend that kind of money for nothing? If the state didn't exist, than our profit makers would invent it as a bogus corporation to fund their costs and absorb their losses. And then when uncle sucker finally went bankrupt, they'd move on to some other "easy money" banana republic to rape.) Please turn off talk radio and stop repeating cliches.

I have a college friend who was doing research in a rural part of South Africa for a company who wanted to extract minerals from an extremely rural area. His job was to create a probability grid for the amount of nickel sulphide in this region. The road he used to get to his research station was constantly flooded and impassable. (This doesn't happen in the USA, because the nanny state takes care of it.). Then his first research station - which was being rented from the government - was partially burnt down from an electrical fire because there are no codes or regulations to ensure building standards. Then... his rebuilt facility was robbed & vandalized because government does not provide proper policing like in the USA, where we take all this shit for granted. As a result investors pulled out and the project was halted.

Point is: profit makers crave the infrastructure, patent protection, legal protection, military protection, subsidies, easy credit and bailouts of Big Government - but they don't want to fucking pay for any of it , so they provide massive financial incentives to your information sources . . . which keep you in the dark about the true recipients of government welfare.

God help us. (he votes)

 

[frigidweirdo]

Have you noticed, when Democrats talk about helping the middle class and poor, they bring up education, daycare, school lunches, health care, infrastructure and so on? Typically revolving around learning and building. Republicans call all that "free stuff" in voices dripping with scorn and derision.

When Republicans talk about helping the middle class and poor, they talk about cutting food stamps and welfare for the poor, which will make them work. They talk about cutting corporate taxes re eliminating them altogether. They talk about tax cuts for the wealthy because they are the job creators and they want to block immigrants from coming here because immigrants will take their minimum wage, low skills job.

I wonder which actually costs the country more, helping the middle class rebuild the country or shoveling money to the wealthy? And I wonder why subsidies and not paying tax isn't "free stuff"? Seems what Republicans are doing costs even more.

Since most of the righties on this site are "conservatives" rather than Republicans your post is moot. Stop ALL the free shit.

/thread

Left wingers are democrats but right wingers aren't Republicans. What?

Did I say that? Nope, YOU did.

Learn to read stupidfuck

Basically, what you're doing you "stupidfuck", is you're implying that right wingers don't have to stand by Republican policies, because somehow, unknown to anyone, the right wing and Republicans are extremely different (let's forget most right wingers vote Republican shall we?), but when it suits you, all left wingers are Democrats. Funny isn't it?

I didn't say you said it, but I was summing up what is essentially the point, you "stupidfuck".

 

[dblack]

So. . . . let me get this straight. You think keeping your own money is. . . . .free stuff? Is that your argument?

No. We think that Exxon's current tax burden, after its subsidies are factored in, does not come close to paying for the military protection of its mideast oil fields. We think decades of concentrated lobbying has resulted in large sections of the corporate sector as net takers- especially when you price in all the subsidies, bailouts, legal protections (including nanny state Patent protection where uncle sucker builds a monopoly fence around your investments), the satellite system, transportation, water systems, energy grids, etc, = advanced industrial infrastructure. And we won't even talk about the military stabilization of the globe so that our largest corporations can have access to all the world's natural resources and labor markets. It would be one thing if you could itemize a tenth of the shit profit-makers get from government, but you can't. You live inside simple cliches about "keeping your own money".

Fucking Boeing started as an appendage of the the Pentagon Budget, which invested heavily in aerospace technology long before it was profitable - then, once profitable, it was simply handed to the private sector. [Socialize the cost, privatize the profit, and get Talk Radio to cover up the welfare upon which so much profit depends.]

Huge portions of the 80s consumer electronics boom came out of the technological advances made under the NASA & Pentagon budgets. [Yup Bevis, landing on the moon and fighting a modern war requires ultra sophisticated technology - technology that finds its way into the private sector where it becomes a gold mine] Problem is: the technology and infrastructure and legal system needs to be paid for before its your money - but you have no knowledge of what the private sector gets from the state or why they've built lobbying empires in Washington DC . . . (so they can descend like locusts on the taxpayer's wallet. OR . . . do you think corporations pump trillions into our political system for fun? You really think our biggest/smartest market players would spend that kind of money for nothing? If the state didn't exist, than our profit makers would invent it as a bogus corporation to fund their costs and absorb their losses. And then when uncle sucker finally went bankrupt, they'd move on to some other "easy money" banana republic to rape.) Please turn off talk radio and stop repeating cliches.

I have a college friend who was doing research in a rural part of South Africa for a company who wanted to extract minerals from an extremely rural area. His job was to create a probability grid for the amount of nickel sulphide in this region. The road he used to get to his research station was constantly flooded and impassable. (This doesn't happen in the USA, because the nanny state takes care of it.). Then his first research station - which was being rented from the government - was partially burnt down from an electrical fire because there are no codes or regulations to ensure building standards. Then... his rebuilt facility was robbed & vandalized because government does not provide proper policing like in the USA, where we take all this shit for granted. As a result investors pulled out and the project was halted.

Point is: profit makers crave the infrastructure, patent protection, legal protection, military protection, subsidies, easy credit and bailouts of Big Government - but they don't want to fucking pay for any of it , so they provide massive financial incentives to your information sources . . . which keep you in the dark about the true recipients of government welfare.

God help us. (he votes)

Yes! Exactly. This IS the end-game of merging state power with economic power. What's so frustrating is that most of those who recognize it as a problem, can only conceive of more of the same when searching for a solution.

 

[rdean]

Why are GOOPers so afraid of education, healthcare, immigration, etc., etc., ,etc.?

Is it because they're ignorant, uninformed, mostly obese, monolingual (and struggling to communicate in English as a First Language), and only able to express themselves in badly spelled obscenities?

No, that can't be it. There must be some other reason why they're stone resistant to anything that will benefit their country.

Republicans believe that if you get an education you will automatically vote Democrat. That's the reason.

 

[rdean]

Have you noticed, when Democrats talk about helping the middle class and poor, they bring up education, daycare, school lunches, health care, infrastructure and so on? Typically revolving around learning and building. Republicans call all that "free stuff" in voices dripping with scorn and derision.

When Republicans talk about helping the middle class and poor, they talk about cutting food stamps and welfare for the poor, which will make them work. They talk about cutting corporate taxes re eliminating them altogether. They talk about tax cuts for the wealthy because they are the job creators and they want to block immigrants from coming here because immigrants will take their minimum wage, low skills job.

I wonder which actually costs the country more, helping the middle class rebuild the country or shoveling money to the wealthy? And I wonder why subsidies and not paying tax isn't "free stuff"? Seems what Republicans are doing costs even more.

The country is broke...

That's ridiculous.

 

[dblack]

Why are GOOPers so afraid of education, healthcare, immigration, etc., etc., ,etc.?

Is it because they're ignorant, uninformed, mostly obese, monolingual (and struggling to communicate in English as a First Language), and only able to express themselves in badly spelled obscenities?

No, that can't be it. There must be some other reason why they're stone resistant to anything that will benefit their country.

Republicans believe that if you get an education you will automatically vote Democrat. That's the reason.

Those dumbass Republicans will believe just about any nonsense, eh?