The rightwing is driven by emotion, not critical thinking

[JakeStarkey]

"The rightwing is driven by emotion, not critical thinking"

For many conservatives fear is the primary motivating factor – fear of change, diversity, and expressions of individual liberty, where for most on the right all three are perceived as some sort of a 'threat' to the conservative as an individual and to society as a whole.

The proof of this is documented by conservative efforts to deny gay Americans their equal protection rights, women their privacy rights, minorities their voting rights, and immigrants their due process rights.

Fear is the fundamental motivating factor behind conservative reactionaryism, and it's as old as civilization itself.

Off topic. The OP was discussing economics.

He is correct, not you. Check the OP.

 

[WelfareQueen]

Not the U.S. Government. And in either scenario the fact remains. Government must feed on the wealth generated by others.

Taxation is not inherently bad. Those who receive government service must pay for it. That is a fact of life. Thus, although government is not created for profit, it should be run efficiently.

I agree. But many who receive benefits never pay into the system. As you say, Jake....."those who receive government service must pay for it."

There should never be a free lunch unless someone is severely disabled (e.g. Down's Syndrome as an example).

You want free healthcare? Clean up a highway.....do community service....something.

 

[WelfareQueen]

Business can be parasitical by paying unfair compensation to its employees.

What??? Define unfair?

Don't play ignorant. That is disrespectful to you as well as me.

Not playing ignorant. Who determines when another human being's compensation is "unfair."

 

[JakeStarkey]

So you would cut the Navy in half and ask the remaining to do more with less....................Tell me about the turn over time for a battlegroup deployed to the Persian Gulf Region...................and how long the Battle Groups spend just getting there..............and back again...............Cut in half is BS........and wouldn't fix the mess we are in........................You would have to cut across the board period or you might as well just PISS IN THE WIND......................We now pay 450 BILLION a year on INTEREST ON THE DEBT ALONE...........................ALL NEED MASSIVE CUTS..............or we are eventually fucked.

You are proving the OP correct. Let go the emotion, and use objectivity. I did not say cut the Navy in half, I said the DOD. And I told you we need to cut the budget. Less emotion, more thinking, please.

 

[-S-]

Our gov't is too damned big for it's britches.....................as I've already stated it spends more than any other nation in the WORLD'S GDP................because some found that they could spend on every want they could think of via the COMMON GOOD and FEEL GOOD policies of dumb ass Socialist..................and then find out they can't pay the bills with their EMOTIONS.......................

The Path to HELL is PAVED with Good Intentions.

...Um, you do realize that the bulk of our money happens to go to the defense budget, right? Not "policies of dumb ass Socialist".

And just in case you were curious on the numbers (i.e. facts), conservative Republicans spend just as much on average as Democrats, just in different ways. Now, just because the way the Republicans spend X amount of money makes you 'FEEL GOOD', and you don't like how Democrats generally choose to spend it, doesn't make you right. It's a matter of opinion, because the both are overspending. One is not bad if the other is okay. Just like fractions, treat both sides equally. It's called objective reasoning.

The truth is out there. Numbers are your friends

 

[JakeStarkey]

Okay.....you are obviously not nearly as smart as you think....so I'll give you a hint.

Government vs Business

One of these entities produces wealth based on products or services it produces.

The other entity produces nothing....and takes money from the wealth producer in order to survive.


Does that help? Now who is more needy and dependent on the other? Think real hard.

Capitalism could not function in anarchy. For instance, the ownership of a building guarantees the rights to the owner. Otherwise, it would be free game for anyone. Law is what maintains the business. Laws secure rights for individuals.

Limited Government is necessary and Law is necessary to protect property rights. That still doesn't change the basic parasitical nature of Government.

And prior to formal Government folks still found ways to protect their property.

Lol are you saying the basic nature of government is not to secure rights?

According to our Founders Government should be limited and address a few basic functions.

1. Interstate commerce

2. Courts

3. Making treaties

4. Defense

In order for We the People to allow the Government these powers basic rights were guaranteed....eventually. The Bill of Rights came way after the Constitution.

The BoR and its passage was part of the ratification struggle. It was ratified four years after the Convention.

The Constitution changes, either by amendment or SCOTUS. It is not a static document.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Not playing ignorant. Who determines when another human being's compensation is "unfair."

That is not the question at play. We know that many employees pay unfair wages. If so, who redresses that inequity.

 

[eagle1462010]

So you would cut the Navy in half and ask the remaining to do more with less....................Tell me about the turn over time for a battlegroup deployed to the Persian Gulf Region...................and how long the Battle Groups spend just getting there..............and back again...............Cut in half is BS........and wouldn't fix the mess we are in........................You would have to cut across the board period or you might as well just PISS IN THE WIND......................We now pay 450 BILLION a year on INTEREST ON THE DEBT ALONE...........................ALL NEED MASSIVE CUTS..............or we are eventually fucked.

You are proving the OP correct. Let go the emotion, and use objectivity. I did not say cut the Navy in half, I said the DOD. And I told you we need to cut the budget. Less emotion, more thinking, please.

BS...................They would cut the military to the bone including the Navy under that scenario and demand that Battlegroups would have to stay deployed for a year or more to compensate for operational duties...............................

And that is not emotion............it is Reality from someone who in my time spent 11months out of a year at sea for operational commitments...................

Your side, which is liberal, is always for cutting military...........nothing new there..............and blanket HALF CUTS to it while side stepping the other side of the equation is BS............Our welfare State is the Lion's share to why we are going down the tubes....................and our economic policies are causing that side of the equation to grow.................ESPECIALLY THROUGH GLOBALIZATION................as we OUTSOURCE or MIDDLE CLASS to 3rd world shitholes.......................ensuring the need FOR MORE GOV'T..................

Get rid of some of the BS regs and lower business taxes to keep them from hauling ass.........................and if they still leave TARIFF them on the way back in as this country has done for a very long time...................which helped us to get where we are at today anyway.

 

[Billy000]

Right-wingers are so driven by emotion and philosophy that they refuse to accept factual information.

Yet, as we can see, you haven't provided any.

You know I have. You never provide any so I guess it's possible you wouldn't know the difference.

 

[Mac1958]

Hardcore partisan ideologues are driven by toxic mix of narcissism and emotion, not critical thinking.

.

 

[LeftofLeft]

Right-wingers are so driven by emotion and philosophy that they refuse to accept factual information.

Supply side economics has proven to be a failure. They continue to endorse it because St. Reagan said it works. Any idiot with a basic education in economics knows it is a sham. Businesses don't do better because they have more to sell. They do better because people buy their shit. This is a consumer driven economy. If you want to stimulate growth, you need to shift the tax burden away from the middle class and poor and allow them to spend money on these businesses. Just because it sounds like a good idea on the surface to give tax breaks to these "job creators", it doesn't mean it actually is. Look where we are because of Reagan economics. The US has the widest income gap in the world and the worst child poverty rate among developed countries. How the fuck could the US be best country in the world if our poverty is the worst among developed nations? It's pathetic.

Like it or not, Obama understands economics. His stimulus created 3 million private jobs. How? Giving the biggest tax cut to the middle class in decades and extending unemployment benefits for the millions who lost their jobs against their will allowing them to spend money they wouldn't of otherwise had.

They also choose to see the government as "evil" and corporations as "victims of evil". Doesn't it bother you people that the prosecution of corporate crime is extremely low? Do you not see that as evil? No. You're Fox News brainwashed zombies.

Do you really believe the US has the worst poverty among "developed nations"? How are you defining poverty? Show US an example of another nation where the income gap is closer and compare that Nation's Middle Class to ours?

 

[Billy000]

Right-wingers are so driven by emotion and philosophy that they refuse to accept factual information.

Supply side economics has proven to be a failure. They continue to endorse it because St. Reagan said it works. Any idiot with a basic education in economics knows it is a sham. Businesses don't do better because they have more to sell. They do better because people buy their shit. This is a consumer driven economy. If you want to stimulate growth, you need to shift the tax burden away from the middle class and poor and allow them to spend money on these businesses. Just because it sounds like a good idea on the surface to give tax breaks to these "job creators", it doesn't mean it actually is. Look where we are because of Reagan economics. The US has the widest income gap in the world and the worst child poverty rate among developed countries. How the fuck could the US be best country in the world if our poverty is the worst among developed nations? It's pathetic.

Like it or not, Obama understands economics. His stimulus created 3 million private jobs. How? Giving the biggest tax cut to the middle class in decades and extending unemployment benefits for the millions who lost their jobs against their will allowing them to spend money they wouldn't of otherwise had.

They also choose to see the government as "evil" and corporations as "victims of evil". Doesn't it bother you people that the prosecution of corporate crime is extremely low? Do you not see that as evil? No. You're Fox News brainwashed zombies.

Do you really believe the US has the worst poverty among "developed nations"? How are you defining poverty? Show US an example of another nation where the income gap is closer and compare that Nation's Middle Class to ours?

The numbers are staggering US is world leader in child poverty

 

[hazlnut]

Right-wingers are so driven by emotion and philosophy that they refuse to accept factual information.

Supply side economics has proven to be a failure. They continue to endorse it because St. Reagan said it works. Any idiot with a basic education in economics knows it is a sham. Businesses don't do better because they have more to sell. They do better because people buy their shit. This is a consumer driven economy. If you want to stimulate growth, you need to shift the tax burden away from the middle class and poor and allow them to spend money on these businesses. Just because it sounds like a good idea on the surface to give tax breaks to these "job creators", it doesn't mean it actually is. Look where we are because of Reagan economics. The US has the widest income gap in the world and the worst child poverty rate among developed countries. How the fuck could the US be best country in the world if our poverty is the worst among developed nations? It's pathetic.

Like it or not, Obama understands economics. His stimulus created 3 million private jobs. How? Giving the biggest tax cut to the middle class in decades and extending unemployment benefits for the millions who lost their jobs against their will allowing them to spend money they wouldn't of otherwise had.

They also choose to see the government as "evil" and corporations as "victims of evil". Doesn't it bother you people that the prosecution of corporate crime is extremely low? Do you not see that as evil? No. You're Fox News brainwashed zombies.

Thank you, great post.

 

[LeftofLeft]

Right-wingers are so driven by emotion and philosophy that they refuse to accept factual information.

Supply side economics has proven to be a failure. They continue to endorse it because St. Reagan said it works. Any idiot with a basic education in economics knows it is a sham. Businesses don't do better because they have more to sell. They do better because people buy their shit. This is a consumer driven economy. If you want to stimulate growth, you need to shift the tax burden away from the middle class and poor and allow them to spend money on these businesses. Just because it sounds like a good idea on the surface to give tax breaks to these "job creators", it doesn't mean it actually is. Look where we are because of Reagan economics. The US has the widest income gap in the world and the worst child poverty rate among developed countries. How the fuck could the US be best country in the world if our poverty is the worst among developed nations? It's pathetic.

Like it or not, Obama understands economics. His stimulus created 3 million private jobs. How? Giving the biggest tax cut to the middle class in decades and extending unemployment benefits for the millions who lost their jobs against their will allowing them to spend money they wouldn't of otherwise had.

They also choose to see the government as "evil" and corporations as "victims of evil". Doesn't it bother you people that the prosecution of corporate crime is extremely low? Do you not see that as evil? No. You're Fox News brainwashed zombies.

Do you really believe the US has the worst poverty among "developed nations"? How are you defining poverty? Show US an example of another nation where the income gap is closer and compare that Nation's Middle Class to ours?

The numbers are staggering US is world leader in child poverty

There's a middle class in Latvia and The Netherlands? How does that compare to US? If the US poverty rates are the worst in the world, compare immigration to Netherlands vs. US? You and your article are telling us that closing the income gap will reduce poverty, particularly child hunger and you site the Netherlands and Latvia by way of an article.

Any other reader on this board want US to be more like these Nations?

Being poor sucks in any nation. Closing income gaps at the price of opportunity is not going to reduce poverty. It is simply going to kill the middle class and actually widen the wealth gap to lock in a true 1 percent.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Anyone who writes we are the leaders of child poverty in the world is mentally feeble, ignorant, malignantly motivated, or all of the above.

The very subjective and shifty source is RawStory.

Read this carefully: "The U.S. has one of the highest relative child poverty rates in the developed world. AsUNICEF reports, “[Children’s] material well-being is highest in the Netherlands and in the four Nordic countries and lowest in Latvia, Lithuania, Romania and the United States.” What does that mean. What does "relative" mean? It is a ranking without quantifiation or qualification.

 

[Billy000]

Right-wingers are so driven by emotion and philosophy that they refuse to accept factual information.

Supply side economics has proven to be a failure. They continue to endorse it because St. Reagan said it works. Any idiot with a basic education in economics knows it is a sham. Businesses don't do better because they have more to sell. They do better because people buy their shit. This is a consumer driven economy. If you want to stimulate growth, you need to shift the tax burden away from the middle class and poor and allow them to spend money on these businesses. Just because it sounds like a good idea on the surface to give tax breaks to these "job creators", it doesn't mean it actually is. Look where we are because of Reagan economics. The US has the widest income gap in the world and the worst child poverty rate among developed countries. How the fuck could the US be best country in the world if our poverty is the worst among developed nations? It's pathetic.

Like it or not, Obama understands economics. His stimulus created 3 million private jobs. How? Giving the biggest tax cut to the middle class in decades and extending unemployment benefits for the millions who lost their jobs against their will allowing them to spend money they wouldn't of otherwise had.

They also choose to see the government as "evil" and corporations as "victims of evil". Doesn't it bother you people that the prosecution of corporate crime is extremely low? Do you not see that as evil? No. You're Fox News brainwashed zombies.

Do you really believe the US has the worst poverty among "developed nations"? How are you defining poverty? Show US an example of another nation where the income gap is closer and compare that Nation's Middle Class to ours?

The numbers are staggering US is world leader in child poverty

There's a middle class in Latvia and The Netherlands? How does that compare to US? If the US poverty rates are the worst in the world, compare immigration to Netherlands vs. US? You and your article are telling us that closing the income gap will reduce poverty, particularly child hunger and you site the Netherlands and Latvia by way of an article.

Any other reader on this board want US to be more like these Nations?

Being poor sucks in any nation. Closing income gaps at the price of opportunity is not going to reduce poverty. It is simply going to kill the middle class and actually widen the wealth gap to lock in a true 1 percent.

Ok I never said the middle class was better in those countries. I was just referring to the poverty and income gap. There's a wide gap between the middle class and poor in this country.

 

[LeftofLeft]

Right-wingers are so driven by emotion and philosophy that they refuse to accept factual information.

Supply side economics has proven to be a failure. They continue to endorse it because St. Reagan said it works. Any idiot with a basic education in economics knows it is a sham. Businesses don't do better because they have more to sell. They do better because people buy their shit. This is a consumer driven economy. If you want to stimulate growth, you need to shift the tax burden away from the middle class and poor and allow them to spend money on these businesses. Just because it sounds like a good idea on the surface to give tax breaks to these "job creators", it doesn't mean it actually is. Look where we are because of Reagan economics. The US has the widest income gap in the world and the worst child poverty rate among developed countries. How the fuck could the US be best country in the world if our poverty is the worst among developed nations? It's pathetic.

Like it or not, Obama understands economics. His stimulus created 3 million private jobs. How? Giving the biggest tax cut to the middle class in decades and extending unemployment benefits for the millions who lost their jobs against their will allowing them to spend money they wouldn't of otherwise had.

They also choose to see the government as "evil" and corporations as "victims of evil". Doesn't it bother you people that the prosecution of corporate crime is extremely low? Do you not see that as evil? No. You're Fox News brainwashed zombies.

Do you really believe the US has the worst poverty among "developed nations"? How are you defining poverty? Show US an example of another nation where the income gap is closer and compare that Nation's Middle Class to ours?

The numbers are staggering US is world leader in child poverty

There's a middle class in Latvia and The Netherlands? How does that compare to US? If the US poverty rates are the worst in the world, compare immigration to Netherlands vs. US? You and your article are telling us that closing the income gap will reduce poverty, particularly child hunger and you site the Netherlands and Latvia by way of an article.

Any other reader on this board want US to be more like these Nations?

Being poor sucks in any nation. Closing income gaps at the price of opportunity is not going to reduce poverty. It is simply going to kill the middle class and actually widen the wealth gap to lock in a true 1 percent.

Ok I never said the middle class was better in those countries. I was just referring to the poverty and income gap. There's a wide gap between the middle class and poor in this country.

Arbitrary mandates to close an income gap only weakens or eliminates a middle class. Here is critical thinking: you site an arrival that says it is best to be poor in Netherlands and Latvia, implying US should be more like these nations. How come immigrants are not flocking to those nations?

 

[mikegriffith1]

Right-wingers are so driven by emotion and philosophy that they refuse to accept factual information.

Supply side economics has proven to be a failure. They continue to endorse it because St. Reagan said it works. Any idiot with a basic education in economics knows it is a sham. Businesses don't do better because they have more to sell. They do better because people buy their shit. This is a consumer driven economy. If you want to stimulate growth, you need to shift the tax burden away from the middle class and poor and allow them to spend money on these businesses. Just because it sounds like a good idea on the surface to give tax breaks to these "job creators", it doesn't mean it actually is. Look where we are because of Reagan economics. The US has the widest income gap in the world and the worst child poverty rate among developed countries. How the fuck could the US be best country in the world if our poverty is the worst among developed nations? It's pathetic.

Like it or not, Obama understands economics. His stimulus created 3 million private jobs. How? Giving the biggest tax cut to the middle class in decades and extending unemployment benefits for the millions who lost their jobs against their will allowing them to spend money they wouldn't of otherwise had.

They also choose to see the government as "evil" and corporations as "victims of evil". Doesn't it bother you people that the prosecution of corporate crime is extremely low? Do you not see that as evil? No. You're Fox News brainwashed zombies.

The facts tell a very different story:

The Facts About Obama s Economic Record US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[SuperDemocrat]

Right-wingers are so driven by emotion and philosophy that they refuse to accept factual information.

Supply side economics has proven to be a failure. They continue to endorse it because St. Reagan said it works. Any idiot with a basic education in economics knows it is a sham. Businesses don't do better because they have more to sell. They do better because people buy their shit. This is a consumer driven economy. If you want to stimulate growth, you need to shift the tax burden away from the middle class and poor and allow them to spend money on these businesses. Just because it sounds like a good idea on the surface to give tax breaks to these "job creators", it doesn't mean it actually is. Look where we are because of Reagan economics. The US has the widest income gap in the world and the worst child poverty rate among developed countries. How the fuck could the US be best country in the world if our poverty is the worst among developed nations? It's pathetic.

Like it or not, Obama understands economics. His stimulus created 3 million private jobs. How? Giving the biggest tax cut to the middle class in decades and extending unemployment benefits for the millions who lost their jobs against their will allowing them to spend money they wouldn't of otherwise had.

They also choose to see the government as "evil" and corporations as "victims of evil". Doesn't it bother you people that the prosecution of corporate crime is extremely low? Do you not see that as evil? No. You're Fox News brainwashed zombies.

The only time the gap grew or when jobs started to come back was when the goo took moved the congress. A very similar thing happen under Clinton. We are going to have 6 percent unemployment for many years. Have fun

 

[Billy000]

Right-wingers are so driven by emotion and philosophy that they refuse to accept factual information.

Supply side economics has proven to be a failure. They continue to endorse it because St. Reagan said it works. Any idiot with a basic education in economics knows it is a sham. Businesses don't do better because they have more to sell. They do better because people buy their shit. This is a consumer driven economy. If you want to stimulate growth, you need to shift the tax burden away from the middle class and poor and allow them to spend money on these businesses. Just because it sounds like a good idea on the surface to give tax breaks to these "job creators", it doesn't mean it actually is. Look where we are because of Reagan economics. The US has the widest income gap in the world and the worst child poverty rate among developed countries. How the fuck could the US be best country in the world if our poverty is the worst among developed nations? It's pathetic.

Like it or not, Obama understands economics. His stimulus created 3 million private jobs. How? Giving the biggest tax cut to the middle class in decades and extending unemployment benefits for the millions who lost their jobs against their will allowing them to spend money they wouldn't of otherwise had.

They also choose to see the government as "evil" and corporations as "victims of evil". Doesn't it bother you people that the prosecution of corporate crime is extremely low? Do you not see that as evil? No. You're Fox News brainwashed zombies.

Do you really believe the US has the worst poverty among "developed nations"? How are you defining poverty? Show US an example of another nation where the income gap is closer and compare that Nation's Middle Class to ours?

The numbers are staggering US is world leader in child poverty

There's a middle class in Latvia and The Netherlands? How does that compare to US? If the US poverty rates are the worst in the world, compare immigration to Netherlands vs. US? You and your article are telling us that closing the income gap will reduce poverty, particularly child hunger and you site the Netherlands and Latvia by way of an article.

Any other reader on this board want US to be more like these Nations?

Being poor sucks in any nation. Closing income gaps at the price of opportunity is not going to reduce poverty. It is simply going to kill the middle class and actually widen the wealth gap to lock in a true 1 percent.

Ok I never said the middle class was better in those countries. I was just referring to the poverty and income gap. There's a wide gap between the middle class and poor in this country.

Arbitrary mandates to close an income gap only weakens or eliminates a middle class. Here is critical thinking: you site an arrival that says it is best to be poor in Netherlands and Latvia, implying US should be more like these nations. How come immigrants are not flocking to those nations?

Lol closing the income gap between the poor and middle class would not weaken the middle class. Higher wages in the poor class strengthens the middle class through consumer spending. Consumer spending helps all the classes. I also never said we should be like those nations. We just need to strengthen our poor and middle class. That's it.