CDZ Why do Conservatives believe that America is no longer great?

[rightwinger]

I think the problem these days is that we hear folks like Warren Buffett say they can afford to pay higher taxes and we think, "yes, well, he can; he's got billions." What we need to hear is the folks who are not that well off, but who are nonetheless in the 1%, saying the same thing...because, quite frankly, it's true for them too. But most folks in that position aren't about to say that because, IMO, they are just plain greedy...that or they genuinely believe that "he who dies with the most wins."

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. Karl Marx said that right? Or was it Lenin? Don't remember for sure. Point is, it's communism.

Doesn't every nation on earth follow that quote "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" ?

Can you name a country that doesn't?

America is all about freedom, the capability of using one's God given gift, to perform to the best of ones ability, to either fail or succeed. Liberalism is all about "FAIRNESS" and instead of trying to bring up everyone to meet the goal of excellence, they tell everyone they will fail, that it is the excellent ones who are at fault for their(failed one's) misery.
Example - A marathon is run by many people but one only wins, so that person gets rewarded for being the best that he can be, he gets a winning trophy and lots of money.
Liberalism - Same man runs but is being held back by the liberal, because the liberal whispers in his ear that he cant do it, that it is too hard, so you might as well give it up. Then when they do finish, even if he won, the liberals would give everyone in the race a participation trophy, share the cash with everyone, and even those that didn't run. That to a liberal is FAIR.
What is the difference between a dead liberal in the road and a dead skunk in the road?

Skid marks in front of the skunk.

View attachment 63178

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need

You don't think America abides by that value?

 

[flacaltenn]

Moderation Message:

Just in case you haven't noticed, this thread is in the Clean Debate Zone. If those words have little meaning to you -- go out to the forum listing and read the special rules for this forum.

If you consider this "a classroom discussion" -- you're probably safe. Unless you went to school in the Bronx..

The topic is set as ---

Donald Trump's major talking point is that America is no longer great- so why do Conservatives believe America is no longer great?

When do Conservatives believe America stopped being great?

Try not to stray to far into the weeds from that topic..

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

In 2003, Hillary Clinton screeched "I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration somehow you're not patriotic. We should stand up and say we are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration."

Cant be patriotic when you have a country that isn't worth being patriotic about. When you have hordes of illegals crossing the border, getting FREE healthcare, food, assisted living, all in the name of liberal compassion for their vote, to have US citizens die at the hands of these miscreants and not a tear shed, or cant have a voice because if you dissent to the liberal policies then the liberal call you names, like a little girl does. Liberals are spoiled children who grew up into an adult body, the liberal is never satisfied even if they get their way, as they must have more, until eventually it consumes them to destruction. Black people are dying every day in America, not by police but by other black people, because they have no hope in America with the First Hope and Change President in office.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

eI do not divide the world into two warring tribes, myself. A person is not a liberal or conservative, but an ideology is. The fact that people do view ideology in terms of identity only makes for group-think, and not all of that group think is based upon liberalism and conservatism.

. One of the main tenets of conservatism has to do with what, exactly it seeks to conserve. What it seeks to conserve are social institutions, ways of life, and operating structures. It places more value on social order than it does social justice. Liberalism, on the other hand, seeks to expand social justice, even at the risk of upsetting the social order.


What too few people ever ask is this "if the social values are already liberal in nature, and if social justice has extended to various minorities once prevented from such, how else do you go about preserving liberalism than through conserving it? This may seem a catch 22 these days, especially inasmuch as the left is now leading the charge to erode many of these liberal vales through it's knee jerk championing of any group other than their own.

I happen to think that many of the battles for which liberalism fought in the 60s have been achieved, and that we are throwing them away under the guise of political correctness. MLK, for instance, looked forward to the day when a person was judged on the content of their character rather than the color of their skin, but color of skin is about all that matters to the new left. This entire notion that anybody BUT minorities are born in a state of political original sin and have to run around like a whipped puppy groveling on and on about their "privilege" is nothing but a reversal of the racism of the 20th century. This isn't a color-blind society we have achieved -- it is simply a society of new sense of privilege based upon identity where some identities are automatically assailed and some are automatically defended.

We should all be judged as individuals. I miss the days when there was at least a glimmer of hop that we could, myself.

 

[oldsoul]

I think the problem these days is that we hear folks like Warren Buffett say they can afford to pay higher taxes and we think, "yes, well, he can; he's got billions." What we need to hear is the folks who are not that well off, but who are nonetheless in the 1%, saying the same thing...because, quite frankly, it's true for them too. But most folks in that position aren't about to say that because, IMO, they are just plain greedy...that or they genuinely believe that "he who dies with the most wins."

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. Karl Marx said that right? Or was it Lenin? Don't remember for sure. Point is, it's communism.

Doesn't every nation on earth follow that quote "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" ?

Can you name a country that doesn't?

Does that make it right? If every nation was declaring war on each other, would that be allthe justifacation you would need to do the same? This country was founded, as became great, BECAUSE we do things differently. Individuality (AKA diversity) is not a dirty word, or concept. Why do liberals never seem to understand this?

 

[rightwinger]

I think the problem these days is that we hear folks like Warren Buffett say they can afford to pay higher taxes and we think, "yes, well, he can; he's got billions." What we need to hear is the folks who are not that well off, but who are nonetheless in the 1%, saying the same thing...because, quite frankly, it's true for them too. But most folks in that position aren't about to say that because, IMO, they are just plain greedy...that or they genuinely believe that "he who dies with the most wins."

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. Karl Marx said that right? Or was it Lenin? Don't remember for sure. Point is, it's communism.

Doesn't every nation on earth follow that quote "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" ?

Can you name a country that doesn't?

Does that make it right? If every nation was declaring war on each other, would that be allthe justifacation you would need to do the same? This country was founded, as became great, BECAUSE we do things differently. Individuality (AKA diversity) is not a dirty word, or concept. Why do liberals never seem to understand this?

Of course it makes it right. It is basic common sense and basic humanity

You do not make someone in abject poverty pay the same as a multi-billionaire.......From each according to his abilities

You do not give welfare money to billionaires just because you give money to the poor......To each according to his needs

 

[jillian]

Donald Trump's major talking point is that America is no longer great- so why do Conservatives believe America is no longer great?

When do Conservatives believe America stopped being great?

they don't believe america is great anymore because a black guy is president, there is marriage equality and no segregation.

aren't they lovely?

America is not great because we got universal healthcare

Conservatives equate it to a return to slavery

you mean radical reactionaries. there is nothing, zero, zilch, nada, conservative about them.

Radical Reactionaries?

They prefer to call themselves "Patriots"...they are anything but

If they were patriots they wouldn't support new-confederate insurrectionists

 

[jillian]

I think the problem these days is that we hear folks like Warren Buffett say they can afford to pay higher taxes and we think, "yes, well, he can; he's got billions." What we need to hear is the folks who are not that well off, but who are nonetheless in the 1%, saying the same thing...because, quite frankly, it's true for them too. But most folks in that position aren't about to say that because, IMO, they are just plain greedy...that or they genuinely believe that "he who dies with the most wins."

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. Karl Marx said that right? Or was it Lenin? Don't remember for sure. Point is, it's communism.

Doesn't every nation on earth follow that quote "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" ?

Can you name a country that doesn't?

Does that make it right? If every nation was declaring war on each other, would that be allthe justifacation you would need to do the same? This country was founded, as became great, BECAUSE we do things differently. Individuality (AKA diversity) is not a dirty word, or concept. Why do liberals never seem to understand this?

So your answer is to let people die if the economy leaves them behind?

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

I think the problem these days is that we hear folks like Warren Buffett say they can afford to pay higher taxes and we think, "yes, well, he can; he's got billions." What we need to hear is the folks who are not that well off, but who are nonetheless in the 1%, saying the same thing...because, quite frankly, it's true for them too. But most folks in that position aren't about to say that because, IMO, they are just plain greedy...that or they genuinely believe that "he who dies with the most wins."

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. Karl Marx said that right? Or was it Lenin? Don't remember for sure. Point is, it's communism.

Doesn't every nation on earth follow that quote "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" ?

Can you name a country that doesn't?

Does that make it right? If every nation was declaring war on each other, would that be allthe justifacation you would need to do the same? This country was founded, as became great, BECAUSE we do things differently. Individuality (AKA diversity) is not a dirty word, or concept. Why do liberals never seem to understand this?

It isn't about individuality but the coming together of all people to UNITE(melting pot) under God , indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. The problem with that is then the government isn't needed, that when people are happy and content, then there is no need for large police forces, or large city councils, as the populace watches over each other and their neighbors. Anyone in the middle 1900's would have block parties, could leave their front doors open, allow their kids to go off and play and not worry about the criminal that in todays society get called the victim, while the victim deserves what the criminal dished out. The world is upside down, and until We the People unite against the common enemy, Liberals Republican and Democrat(who want to control US) we can defeat the EVIL brewing in Washington DC. but if the people don't, then it is going to lead US to the road to serfdom. The Road to Serfdom - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Road to Serfdom (German: Der Weg zur Knechtschaft) is a book written by the Austrian-born economist and philosopher Friedrich von Hayek (1899–1992) between 1940–1943, in which he "[warns] of the danger of tyranny that inevitably results from government control of economic decision-making through central planning."[1] He further argues that the abandonment of individualism and classical liberalism inevitably leads to a loss of freedom, the creation of an oppressive society, the tyranny of a dictator, and the serfdom of the individual.

 

[oldsoul]

I think the problem these days is that we hear folks like Warren Buffett say they can afford to pay higher taxes and we think, "yes, well, he can; he's got billions." What we need to hear is the folks who are not that well off, but who are nonetheless in the 1%, saying the same thing...because, quite frankly, it's true for them too. But most folks in that position aren't about to say that because, IMO, they are just plain greedy...that or they genuinely believe that "he who dies with the most wins."

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. Karl Marx said that right? Or was it Lenin? Don't remember for sure. Point is, it's communism.

Doesn't every nation on earth follow that quote "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" ?

Can you name a country that doesn't?

Does that make it right? If every nation was declaring war on each other, would that be allthe justifacation you would need to do the same? This country was founded, as became great, BECAUSE we do things differently. Individuality (AKA diversity) is not a dirty word, or concept. Why do liberals never seem to understand this?

Of course it makes it right. It is basic common sense and basic humanity

You do not make someone in abject poverty pay the same as a multi-billionaire.......From each according to his abilities

You do not give welfare money to billionaires just because you give money to the poor......To each according to his needs

And there enlies the fundamental difference between you and I. I do not subscribe to any "herd mentality". Ideas must stand on their merits, or fail on them. I reject the notion that it is right because "every nation on earth" does it. No, it is not common sense and basic humanity. Basic humanity would be to TEACH the man to fish, not just GIVE the man A fish. If you take a fish, that I caught, and give it to someone who did not go fishing, that is theft, and redistribution of wealth. Let the man go fishing, if he is unsuccessful and hungry, I will give him what I beleive I can. YOU need to stay out of it.

 

[rightwinger]

I think the problem these days is that we hear folks like Warren Buffett say they can afford to pay higher taxes and we think, "yes, well, he can; he's got billions." What we need to hear is the folks who are not that well off, but who are nonetheless in the 1%, saying the same thing...because, quite frankly, it's true for them too. But most folks in that position aren't about to say that because, IMO, they are just plain greedy...that or they genuinely believe that "he who dies with the most wins."

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. Karl Marx said that right? Or was it Lenin? Don't remember for sure. Point is, it's communism.

Doesn't every nation on earth follow that quote "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" ?

Can you name a country that doesn't?

Does that make it right? If every nation was declaring war on each other, would that be allthe justifacation you would need to do the same? This country was founded, as became great, BECAUSE we do things differently. Individuality (AKA diversity) is not a dirty word, or concept. Why do liberals never seem to understand this?

Of course it makes it right. It is basic common sense and basic humanity

You do not make someone in abject poverty pay the same as a multi-billionaire.......From each according to his abilities

You do not give welfare money to billionaires just because you give money to the poor......To each according to his needs

And there enlies the fundamental difference between you and I. I do not subscribe to any "herd mentality". Ideas must stand on their merits, or fail on them. I reject the notion that it is right because "every nation on earth" does it. No, it is not common sense and basic humanity. Basic humanity would be to TEACH the man to fish, not just GIVE the man A fish. If you take a fish, that I caught, and give it to someone who did not go fishing, that is theft, and redistribution of wealth. Let the man go fishing, if he is unsuccessful and hungry, I will give him what I beleive I can. YOU need to stay out of it.

"Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day, teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime"
But what do you do when there are no more fish in the pond?
That is the problem with our poor communities

 

[Correll]

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. Karl Marx said that right? Or was it Lenin? Don't remember for sure. Point is, it's communism.

Doesn't every nation on earth follow that quote "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" ?

Can you name a country that doesn't?

Does that make it right? If every nation was declaring war on each other, would that be allthe justifacation you would need to do the same? This country was founded, as became great, BECAUSE we do things differently. Individuality (AKA diversity) is not a dirty word, or concept. Why do liberals never seem to understand this?

Of course it makes it right. It is basic common sense and basic humanity

You do not make someone in abject poverty pay the same as a multi-billionaire.......From each according to his abilities

You do not give welfare money to billionaires just because you give money to the poor......To each according to his needs

And there enlies the fundamental difference between you and I. I do not subscribe to any "herd mentality". Ideas must stand on their merits, or fail on them. I reject the notion that it is right because "every nation on earth" does it. No, it is not common sense and basic humanity. Basic humanity would be to TEACH the man to fish, not just GIVE the man A fish. If you take a fish, that I caught, and give it to someone who did not go fishing, that is theft, and redistribution of wealth. Let the man go fishing, if he is unsuccessful and hungry, I will give him what I beleive I can. YOU need to stay out of it.

"Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day, teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime"
But what do you do when there are no more fish in the pond?
That is the problem with our poor communities

And Trump is the only one prepared to address that one.

 

[oldsoul]

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. Karl Marx said that right? Or was it Lenin? Don't remember for sure. Point is, it's communism.

Doesn't every nation on earth follow that quote "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" ?

Can you name a country that doesn't?

Does that make it right? If every nation was declaring war on each other, would that be allthe justifacation you would need to do the same? This country was founded, as became great, BECAUSE we do things differently. Individuality (AKA diversity) is not a dirty word, or concept. Why do liberals never seem to understand this?

Of course it makes it right. It is basic common sense and basic humanity

You do not make someone in abject poverty pay the same as a multi-billionaire.......From each according to his abilities

You do not give welfare money to billionaires just because you give money to the poor......To each according to his needs

And there enlies the fundamental difference between you and I. I do not subscribe to any "herd mentality". Ideas must stand on their merits, or fail on them. I reject the notion that it is right because "every nation on earth" does it. No, it is not common sense and basic humanity. Basic humanity would be to TEACH the man to fish, not just GIVE the man A fish. If you take a fish, that I caught, and give it to someone who did not go fishing, that is theft, and redistribution of wealth. Let the man go fishing, if he is unsuccessful and hungry, I will give him what I beleive I can. YOU need to stay out of it.

"Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day, teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime"
But what do you do when there are no more fish in the pond?
That is the problem with our poor communities

No fish left? I assume by "fish" you mean either jobs or money. Seeing as the thought that there is no money, is preposterous, I will go with jobs.
That statement would mean that ALL goods and services are brought into these areas, and that noone there works, and noone has the ability to go elsewhere to find work. I reject both. There are plenty of fish, just too few fishermen.
Besides, if there where no more fish in the pond, we are WAY too late to fix the problem, better find a new pond.

 

[rightwinger]

Doesn't every nation on earth follow that quote "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" ?

Can you name a country that doesn't?

Does that make it right? If every nation was declaring war on each other, would that be allthe justifacation you would need to do the same? This country was founded, as became great, BECAUSE we do things differently. Individuality (AKA diversity) is not a dirty word, or concept. Why do liberals never seem to understand this?

Of course it makes it right. It is basic common sense and basic humanity

You do not make someone in abject poverty pay the same as a multi-billionaire.......From each according to his abilities

You do not give welfare money to billionaires just because you give money to the poor......To each according to his needs

And there enlies the fundamental difference between you and I. I do not subscribe to any "herd mentality". Ideas must stand on their merits, or fail on them. I reject the notion that it is right because "every nation on earth" does it. No, it is not common sense and basic humanity. Basic humanity would be to TEACH the man to fish, not just GIVE the man A fish. If you take a fish, that I caught, and give it to someone who did not go fishing, that is theft, and redistribution of wealth. Let the man go fishing, if he is unsuccessful and hungry, I will give him what I beleive I can. YOU need to stay out of it.

"Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day, teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime"
But what do you do when there are no more fish in the pond?
That is the problem with our poor communities

And Trump is the only one prepared to address that one.

Trump is very protective of his ponds and does not allow poor people to fish in them

 

[Correll]

Does that make it right? If every nation was declaring war on each other, would that be allthe justifacation you would need to do the same? This country was founded, as became great, BECAUSE we do things differently. Individuality (AKA diversity) is not a dirty word, or concept. Why do liberals never seem to understand this?

Of course it makes it right. It is basic common sense and basic humanity

You do not make someone in abject poverty pay the same as a multi-billionaire.......From each according to his abilities

You do not give welfare money to billionaires just because you give money to the poor......To each according to his needs

And there enlies the fundamental difference between you and I. I do not subscribe to any "herd mentality". Ideas must stand on their merits, or fail on them. I reject the notion that it is right because "every nation on earth" does it. No, it is not common sense and basic humanity. Basic humanity would be to TEACH the man to fish, not just GIVE the man A fish. If you take a fish, that I caught, and give it to someone who did not go fishing, that is theft, and redistribution of wealth. Let the man go fishing, if he is unsuccessful and hungry, I will give him what I beleive I can. YOU need to stay out of it.

"Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day, teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime"
But what do you do when there are no more fish in the pond?
That is the problem with our poor communities

And Trump is the only one prepared to address that one.

Trump is very protective of his ponds and does not allow poor people to fish in them

HIs platform of reducing the labor pool, and increasing jobs with better trade policy is the only one that might seriously improve opportunities for our poor communities.

 

[rightwinger]

Doesn't every nation on earth follow that quote "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" ?

Can you name a country that doesn't?

Does that make it right? If every nation was declaring war on each other, would that be allthe justifacation you would need to do the same? This country was founded, as became great, BECAUSE we do things differently. Individuality (AKA diversity) is not a dirty word, or concept. Why do liberals never seem to understand this?

Of course it makes it right. It is basic common sense and basic humanity

You do not make someone in abject poverty pay the same as a multi-billionaire.......From each according to his abilities

You do not give welfare money to billionaires just because you give money to the poor......To each according to his needs

And there enlies the fundamental difference between you and I. I do not subscribe to any "herd mentality". Ideas must stand on their merits, or fail on them. I reject the notion that it is right because "every nation on earth" does it. No, it is not common sense and basic humanity. Basic humanity would be to TEACH the man to fish, not just GIVE the man A fish. If you take a fish, that I caught, and give it to someone who did not go fishing, that is theft, and redistribution of wealth. Let the man go fishing, if he is unsuccessful and hungry, I will give him what I beleive I can. YOU need to stay out of it.

"Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day, teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime"
But what do you do when there are no more fish in the pond?
That is the problem with our poor communities

No fish left? I assume by "fish" you mean either jobs or money. Seeing as the thought that there is no money, is preposterous, I will go with jobs.
That statement would mean that ALL goods and services are brought into these areas, and that noone there works, and noone has the ability to go elsewhere to find work. I reject both. There are plenty of fish, just too few fishermen.
Besides, if there where no more fish in the pond, we are WAY too late to fix the problem, better find a new pond.

Yes, fish equates to jobs

So merely telling a poor person he needs to get a job if he wants to eat doesn't work if the vast majority of jobs have left a community

So what do we do with communities with no more fish in the pond?
- We have to "Give the people a fish" so they can continue to eat
- We can try to restock the pond by bringing in more jobs
- We can help people identify and move to communities that have plenty of fish

 

[rightwinger]

Of course it makes it right. It is basic common sense and basic humanity

You do not make someone in abject poverty pay the same as a multi-billionaire.......From each according to his abilities

You do not give welfare money to billionaires just because you give money to the poor......To each according to his needs

And there enlies the fundamental difference between you and I. I do not subscribe to any "herd mentality". Ideas must stand on their merits, or fail on them. I reject the notion that it is right because "every nation on earth" does it. No, it is not common sense and basic humanity. Basic humanity would be to TEACH the man to fish, not just GIVE the man A fish. If you take a fish, that I caught, and give it to someone who did not go fishing, that is theft, and redistribution of wealth. Let the man go fishing, if he is unsuccessful and hungry, I will give him what I beleive I can. YOU need to stay out of it.

"Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day, teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime"
But what do you do when there are no more fish in the pond?
That is the problem with our poor communities

And Trump is the only one prepared to address that one.

Trump is very protective of his ponds and does not allow poor people to fish in them

HIs platform of reducing the labor pool, and increasing jobs with better trade policy is the only one that might seriously improve opportunities for our poor communities.

More empty promises from Trump
He has never explained how he intends to do that
He has nothing in his background that shows he has brought jobs to poor communities

 

[320 Years of History]

Did you know that at the end of Bill Clnton's(I did not have sexual relations with that woman) administration, that the Dot Com Bubble burst because of those taxes that were imposed upon them in 1993. That sure was something the liberals seem to forget. When you tax people, a few years later, the economy will tank, when you lower taxes, a few years later, the economy will roar. Go ask John F. Kennedy about that.

The taxes to which I referred are those enacted in 1993, not 1997. The 1993 tax bills produced the following:

• Previously the top individual tax rate of 31% applied to all income over $51,900. The Act created a new bracket of 36% for income above $115,000, and 39.6% for income above $250,000.
• Previously, corporate income above $335,000 was taxed at 34%.
• The Act created new brackets of 35% for income from $10 million to $15 million, 38% for income from $15 million to $18.33 million, and 35% for income above $18.33 million.
• The 2.9% Medicare tax previously was capped to only apply to the first $135,000 of income. This cap was removed. Transportation fuels taxes were raised by 4.3 cents per gallon. The portion of Social Security benefits subject to income taxes was raised from 50% to 85%.
• The phase-out of the personal exemption and limit on itemized deductions were permanently extended. The AMT tax rate was increased from 24% to tiered rates of 26% and 28%.
• Part IV Section 14131: Expansion of the Earned Income Tax Credit and added inflation adjustments.

The scope of the 1993 tax legislation vastly outstripped the 1997 TRA, which is the legislation that caused the burst...most notably, the TRA was a tax reduction, not a tax increase.

Red:
Are you aware your statement is not an accurate and complete representation of truth, even if tax rates played a role?

The study linked in the question above shows that it is the volatility, not the mere increase or decrease in tax rates, that caused the burst. You'll note, assuming you bother to read the study in its entirety, that it was the difference between the dividend rate and the capital gains rates that caused the burst, not the rate of taxation.

Maybe if you look closely at the 1993 mark, you can see that already the S & P started going down, but really tanked 4 years after the money wasnt there.The taxes of 1993 produced for the 1st time in 40 years, a House majority of Republicans led by Newt Gingrich. With Newt's contract on America, Clinton approved 7 of the 10 and that got the US rolling. But once again, it takes a while for taxes to start affecting business, as it removes capital for expansion. In 1999 the results showed with the collapse of Enron, MCI/World Com, and other Dot coms. Happens all the time, which is happening today. Dow is down over 2000 points since its high last year, oil is hovering around 27 dollars a barrel, and all Obama can do is hike up taxes again, with $10 tax on oil. There are never enough taxes when a liberal is in charge, as it isn't their money being given to liberal special interest groups.

 

[320 Years of History]

Does that make it right? If every nation was declaring war on each other, would that be allthe justifacation you would need to do the same? This country was founded, as became great, BECAUSE we do things differently. Individuality (AKA diversity) is not a dirty word, or concept. Why do liberals never seem to understand this?

Hopefully those liberals who seek to deny benefits based on one's religious affiliation can answer your question....

 

[Correll]

And there enlies the fundamental difference between you and I. I do not subscribe to any "herd mentality". Ideas must stand on their merits, or fail on them. I reject the notion that it is right because "every nation on earth" does it. No, it is not common sense and basic humanity. Basic humanity would be to TEACH the man to fish, not just GIVE the man A fish. If you take a fish, that I caught, and give it to someone who did not go fishing, that is theft, and redistribution of wealth. Let the man go fishing, if he is unsuccessful and hungry, I will give him what I beleive I can. YOU need to stay out of it.

"Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day, teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime"
But what do you do when there are no more fish in the pond?
That is the problem with our poor communities

And Trump is the only one prepared to address that one.

Trump is very protective of his ponds and does not allow poor people to fish in them

HIs platform of reducing the labor pool, and increasing jobs with better trade policy is the only one that might seriously improve opportunities for our poor communities.

More empty promises from Trump
He has never explained how he intends to do that
He has nothing in his background that shows he has brought jobs to poor communities

It has never been his job, up to now.

And his promises to deport illegals and restrict immigration would reduce supply of labor, thus improving job and wages for the Working Poor.

AND his promises to renegotiate bad trade deals, specifically with China are likely to reduce or reverse outsourcing and improve jobs and wages for the Working POor.