• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Are Republicans against helping the middle class?

Are Republicans against helping the middle class?


  • Total voters
    83
I dod not see that at all. But I would be happy to examine your evidence of the claim.

you don't see it because you are a democratic party member, who will support what ever the party wants to do, the only time you are angry with your party is when you believe the party has given in to republicans.

BOTH parties are bad, and dont give a hoot, about the people, the states or the union.
 
you don't see it because you are a democratic party member, who will support what ever the party wants to do, the only time you are angry with your party is when you believe the party has given in to republicans.

BOTH parties are bad, and dont give a hoot, about the people, the states or the union.

terrific. :roll::doh
 
I want to say no, because to make that kind of partisan blanket statement instinctively feels the same to me as agreeing that "Republicans want to shoot puppies out of canons," which is of course ridiculous. That being said, any time a discussion comes up in which the interests of the rich are pitted against poor or middle class, the theme that conservatives can be relied upon to bring to that thread is blanket support of the rich and big business every...single...time. I have yet to see a such a thread in which Republicans said "You know what? I think the rich can go eff themselves on this particular issue." Instead, the conversation is entirely drowned out by accusations of "class warfare" by page two. So conservatives can say they support the middle class or the poor, but if you look at their rhetoric it forms a very different picture.

So you basically did what you said was wrong, you made a blanket statement.
 
College should just be free, or regulated to make sure the prices don't go over the roof like they are now, just look at college prices and the drastic rise.
How are you going to get the professors, janitors, mechanics, etc. to work for free? Not to mention the cost of the structures, utilities and so forth. No one pays for that?
 
No, they just oppose your ideas. Learn the difference.
 
College should just be free, or regulated to make sure the prices don't go over the roof like they are now, just look at college prices and the drastic rise.

:lol: So why shouldn't people pay for their own education? Because they need it?
 
The rate in which costs of higher education have skyrocketed is disgusting.

Do you guys ever ponder why everything the government touches gets more expensive?
 
:lol: So why shouldn't people pay for their own education? Because they need it?

Education needs to be accessible to all, a major barrier to education is the price.
 
It is not ridiculous. Republicans time and time again shoot down every damn thing that comes up that will actually help the middle class. The only thing that they can seem to put forward is tax breaks that primarily benefit wealthy people. The rest of what they do is designed to burden the middle class, and then tell them its all their fault because they don't work hard enough. They are full of bull****. All they care about is the interests of the wealthy. Its socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor.

Do democrats ever have an idea to help the middle class or the poor that doesn't harm someone else? No? I didn't think so.
 
Do you guys ever ponder why everything the government touches gets more expensive?

Yes, because the government involvement in colleges directly correlates with the price raising..
 
Education needs to be accessible to all, a major barrier to education is the price.

Price is always a barrier to someone.
 
Do democrats ever have an idea to help the middle class or the poor that doesn't harm someone else? No? I didn't think so.

Yes, they do, and I don't see how free community college hurts people, along with wage increases.
 
Price is always a barrier to someone.

But not to the insane extent that's present in our college system when compared to other countries who have much more productive students and education systems, that are essentially free.
 
What makes this thread even sadder is that the opposition from republicans in the example was based on procedure, and not necessarily an unwillingness to consider the bill. I am not a fan of republicans, but for god's sake, let's try and be honest, accurate and make decent points, and not just spew over the top stupid rhetoric.

I always enjoy analogies....

I'd say everyone would agree in a GENERAL sense, it's beneficial for children to get good grades.

However, let's say you have two teachers.

Teach A offers their students 10 points of extra credit after every test. Teach B doesn't.

Can we say Teacher B "against" helping kids get good grades based simply on the fact he doesn't provide extra credit?

No, that's a ridiculous stance to take. What's more likely is that Teacher B feels that a large amount of extra credit may cause children to actually NOT attempt to study as hard because they have that extra buffer, or believe that inflated grades due to extra credit may give the child a false belief of understanding on a subject beyond what they actually have, or that they feel it's better for a child to be faced with the reality of a bad grade if they don't study well as they feel ultimately it will motivate the child to do better in the future. Or, simply put, he feels while helping kids get good grades IS important, that there are OTHER important things as well when it comes children that outweigh the benefit of giving extra credit. Or hell, perhaps he just thinks the very concept of "extra credit" is against the code of conduct for the school and so he refrains from allowing for such.

So many questions like those of the OP are so reliant on the world functioning in this binary fashion, on top of each situation or issue existing in some kind of strange vacuum, all combined with this self-important belief that one's worldview is inherently superior and more "true" than anyone elses.

By and large Republicans care about the middle class. How much they weigh focusing on help of the middle class with their views on the role of government, or how said help may negatively effect other segments of the population, or may negatively effect the country as a whole in the short or long term, may differ from Democrats. Additionally, what TYPES of "help" is viewed as more important or more beneficial may differ. As would the METHODS in which they feel help should be given. But it's ridiculous, imho, to suggest either party by and large simply are against helping any particular segment of the population in some form as a matter of principle. Both sides generally believe their views and methods will ultimately help the majority of people in this country across the spectrum of race, gender, age, class, etc and that's why they push so hard for their ideas to occur. The other side may disagree that the ultimate result actually DOES help any of those things, but that's a matter of perspective and opinion regarding how one judges the matter as opposed to some kind of objective fact like the OP seems so desperately to establish.
 
I always enjoy analogies....

I'd say everyone would agree in a GENERAL sense, it's beneficial for children to get good grades.

However, let's say you have two teachers.

Teach A offers their students 10 points of extra credit after every test. Teach B doesn't.

Can we say Teacher B "against" helping kids get good grades based simply on the fact he doesn't provide extra credit?

No, that's a ridiculous stance to take. What's more likely is that Teacher B feels that a large amount of extra credit may cause children to actually NOT attempt to study as hard because they have that extra buffer, or believe that inflated grades due to extra credit may give the child a false belief of understanding on a subject beyond what they actually have, or that they feel it's better for a child to be faced with the reality of a bad grade if they don't study well as they feel ultimately it will motivate the child to do better in the future. Or, simply put, he feels while helping kids get good grades IS important, that there are OTHER important things as well when it comes children that outweigh the benefit of giving extra credit. Or hell, perhaps he just thinks the very concept of "extra credit" is against the code of conduct for the school and so he refrains from allowing for such.

So many questions like those of the OP are so reliant on the world functioning in this binary fashion, on top of each situation or issue existing in some kind of strange vacuum, all combined with this self-important belief that one's worldview is inherently superior and more "true" than anyone elses.

By and large Republicans care about the middle class. How much they weigh focusing on help of the middle class with their views on the role of government, or how said help may negatively effect other segments of the population, or may negatively effect the country as a whole in the short or long term, may differ from Democrats. Additionally, what TYPES of "help" is viewed as more important or more beneficial may differ. As would the METHODS in which they feel help should be given. But it's ridiculous, imho, to suggest either party by and large simply are against helping any particular segment of the population in some form as a matter of principle. Both sides generally believe their views and methods will ultimately help the majority of people in this country across the spectrum of race, gender, age, class, etc and that's why they push so hard for their ideas to occur. The other side may disagree that the ultimate result actually DOES help any of those things, but that's a matter of perspective and opinion regarding how one judges the matter as opposed to some kind of objective fact like the OP seems so desperately to establish.

Than maybe the republicans should actually propose something meant to help the middle class, putting aside all of the analogies and what not, let's be real now.
 
Yes, because the government involvement in colleges directly correlates with the price raising..

The reason tuition prices are rising so quickly is because of supply and demand. The demand for a college education has increased because graduating college dramatically increases job prospects and because of government subsidies. To put it simply, when you subsidize something it becomes cheaper for people to consume and so people consume more of it and the prices rises. The fact is the more you subsidize it the more the price will rise. It's economics 101.
 
But not to the insane extent that's present in our college system when compared to other countries who have much more productive students and education systems, that are essentially free.

High prices is not something to resolve with government. When a product becomes overpriced to the point no one can afford it other solutions are needed. You should not fix an unmarketable field with government intervention.
 
Back
Top Bottom