Remember when Republicans used to claim might means right!

Jarod

Jarod

Well-known member
Contributor
When Bush "won" his elections they claimed that it was a validation of his political policies....


What a fucking crock.

Will they hold to that if Obama wins?
 
Jarod said:
When Bush "won" his elections they claimed that it was a validation of his political policies....


What a fucking crock.

Will they hold to that if Obama wins?
Click to expand...

I only remember him saying that he had some political capital, but it was fragile and used up all too quickly on stupid Schiavo affair.

If Obama does get in it's because Americans want an end to the Iraq war and they are tired of the spending they've seen and economy jitters. Obama's political capital should be used to end the war and control spending. If he tries to use it on giant social welfare programs and initiatives, he will lose his political capital just like Clinton did in the early 90's and the Repubs took congress.
NO trillion dollar universal healthcare!
 
THat is what Bush said. But other Republicans on this cite used to crow about how because Bush won it ment his political ideas were correct.
 
Jarod said:
THat is what Bush said. But other Republicans on this cite used to crow about how because Bush won it ment his political ideas were correct.
Click to expand...

Allowing more private choice for SS was one of his platforms for 2004, that idea was correct. Something still needs to be done with an aging populace and you can bet Dems and Obama will solve it in one way and one way only - with a very large tax increase.

The right thing to do is allow people to invest their own savings privately where there is better return and they can use it more when needed.
 
The right thing to do is allow people to invest their own savings privately where there is better return and they can use it more when needed.
//

I can't believe you actually said that ocnsidering the market and economy.
Well yes I can considering the source.
 
KingCondanomation said:
Allowing more private choice for SS was one of his platforms for 2004, that idea was correct. Something still needs to be done with an aging populace and you can bet Dems and Obama will solve it in one way and one way only - with a very large tax increase.

The right thing to do is allow people to invest their own savings privately where there is better return and they can use it more when needed.
Click to expand...

And what do we do with starving people who had all the money investedin AIG? The government will end up feeding them.
 
uscitizen said:
The right thing to do is allow people to invest their own savings privately where there is better return and they can use it more when needed.
//

I can't believe you actually said that ocnsidering the market and economy.
Well yes I can considering the source.
Click to expand...
Overall, over 10 years or more, you would have ALWAYS gotten a better return on the market than government.

Just give people free choice, let THEM decide. If it's a worse deal, then they won't do it, but too many hardcores on the left are scared to allow that freedom because they know the private sector gives a better return.

us, do you believe in letting people freely choose how to invest their money?
 
Jarod said:
And what do we do with starving people who had all the money investedin AIG? The government will end up feeding them.
Click to expand...

Food stamp recipients have little to no stock. Most people are capable of freely weighing risk and deciding what level is right for them individually.

Just TRUST people. Let go of your need to control them.
 
KingCondanomation said:
Overall, over 10 years or more, you would have ALWAYS gotten a better return on the market than government.

Just give people free choice, let THEM decide. If it's a worse deal, then they won't do it, but too many hardcores on the left are scared to allow that freedom because they know the private sector gives a better return.

us, do you believe in letting people freely choose how to invest their money?
Click to expand...

It is obvious with re-electing bush and personal debt levels upside down car loans, etc that people are too stupid to decide. that WAS THE REASON SS was set up in the first place. and that has not changed.
 
KingCondanomation said:
Overall, over 10 years or more, you would have ALWAYS gotten a better return on the market than government.

Just give people free choice, let THEM decide. If it's a worse deal, then they won't do it, but too many hardcores on the left are scared to allow that freedom because they know the private sector gives a better return.

us, do you believe in letting people freely choose how to invest their money?
Click to expand...

I believe in requireing people to save a bare minimum in safe government back investments, then after that people should be free to do what ever they want, including not investing at all.
 
Jarod said:
I believe in requireing people to save a bare minimum in safe government back investments, then after that people should be free to do what ever they want, including not investing at all.
Click to expand...

which is where we are now.
SS then 401k or whatever as elective.
 
Jarod said:
Yup. If you turn SS over to allow risky investments, you defeat the entire purpose.
Click to expand...
t tapping into tax type of money for "growth"
as in privitization, vouchers, etc.
Also the subprime was a "creative" way to pump up the profits where very little real sustainable growth existed.
 
Jarod said:
I believe in requireing people to save a bare minimum in safe government back investments, then after that people should be free to do what ever they want, including not investing at all.
Click to expand...
You don't get SS payouts until you are 65, what if you have cancer in your 40's? What if you need the money early?
You can't assume that you are always protecting people, very often you are hurting them and the ones who need it the most.

Please, do the right thing and let people make their own free decisions. You aren't like other Liberals on here Jarod. Just let go of trying to decide what is best for them, you certainly don't like it when social Conservatives do for you.
 
uscitizen said:
It is obvious with re-electing bush and personal debt levels upside down car loans, etc that people are too stupid to decide. that WAS THE REASON SS was set up in the first place. and that has not changed.
Click to expand...
Are they going to get any smarter by having government decide for them?

Think of the road you are going down, how can people ever learn if there are no consequences for their actions? And if you can't trust them, then don't expect freedom to last long.

"There can be no freedom without freedom to fail." – Eric Hoffer (1902-1983), The Ordeal of Change, 1964
 
KingCondanomation said:
Are they going to get any smarter by having government decide for them?

Think of the road you are going down, how can people ever learn if there are no consequences for their actions? And if you can't trust them, then don't expect freedom to last long.

"There can be no freedom without freedom to fail." – Eric Hoffer (1902-1983), The Ordeal of Change, 1964
Click to expand...

LOL. I seriously doubt he meant anything you're meaning.
 
SSI disability Dano.

Ohh I know the it's my money and I want it now mantra.
Well you are too stupid to have it now.
so there.
 
KingCondanomation said:
You don't get SS payouts until you are 65, what if you have cancer in your 40's? What if you need the money early?
You can't assume that you are always protecting people, very often you are hurting them and the ones who need it the most.

Please, do the right thing and let people make their own free decisions. You aren't like other Liberals on here Jarod. Just let go of trying to decide what is best for them, you certainly don't like it when social Conservatives do for you.
Click to expand...

Social security is a minimum safety not for seniors. There is nothing wrong with that, and if we made it voluntary there would be hotshots out there ditching it and starving in the streets when they're 65, and we'd just have to pay for them with welfare anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top