• 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!

Best US President

Who Was the Best US President?

  • Abraham Lincoln

    Votes: 15 19.0%

  • Franklin Roosevelt

    Votes: 20 25.3%

  • George Washington

    Votes: 9 11.4%

  • Thomas Jefferson

    Votes: 5 6.3%

  • Theodore Roosevelt

    Votes: 4 5.1%

  • Woodrow Wilson

    Votes: 1 1.3%

  • Andrew Jackson

    Votes: 2 2.5%

  • Harry Truman

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Lyndon Johnson

    Votes: 1 1.3%

  • Other (please list below)

    Votes: 22 27.8%
  • Total voters
    79
TurtleDude said:
that is a complete fail

and furthermore people don't exist to serve your welfare socialist schemes. the rich pay too much taxes as it is and the government wastes too much money. subsidizing anything tends to increase it and the dems have subsidized dependency in order to get more dependent overs.

we make poverty too easy
Click to expand...


I bet corporations like Frigidaire enjoy the profits they reap from the poor having refrigerators
 
teamosil said:
So, once again, you are unable to counter my evidence or come up with any of your own. Why do you think that keeps happening to you?
Click to expand...

you don't have any evidence-you just spew platitudes and pretend they prove something
 
winston53660 said:
I bet corporations like Frigidaire enjoy the profits they reap from the poor having refrigerators
Click to expand...

yeah and the poor need plasma tvs cell phones etc that we pay for
 
zgoldsmith23 said:
Pardon me? I'm sure that's much of a counter argument.
Click to expand...

Oh its proof that would survive a Harvard Dissertation defense inquiry I am sure. remember-if they feel it is true that is iron clad proof from the left
 
zgoldsmith23 said:
Pardon me? I'm sure that's much of a counter argument.
Click to expand...

Well, many, maybe even most, folks on the right seem to have trouble dealing with concepts that are not simplistic absolutes. What you did there, for example, was heard redistribution of wealth and you assumed that must mean to absolutely equalize all wealth, which of course would be absurd. What we're actually talking about in the US in terms of poverty amelioration is less than half of one percent of our GDP. The countries that have essentially managed to eliminate poverty spend about 1% of their GDP on it. Nothing remotely like totally evening out all the money so everybody makes the same of course. But because you approached it in binary mode, you jumped to that assumption (if it isn't 0, it must be 1), and then reacted to that absurd notion instead of the actual concept we're discussing. Anyways, that is a longwinded explanation, but it happens all the time. Literally many times every single day. It is, by far, the biggest difficulty conservatives on a whole struggle with in debating these issues. If the right could just get over that one problem the whole world would take a massive step forwards. The end of bumperstickerism!
 
winston53660 said:
And corporations profit from........
Click to expand...

ask most corporate shareholders what they want-high taxes taken from THEM so the dems can buy votes of the poor and that the poor can buy stuff with our money, or a society where there are less dependents, less suckers of the public teat and less pimps in office
 
teamosil said:
Well, many, maybe even most, folks on the right seem to have trouble dealing with concepts that are not simplistic absolutes. What you did there, for example, was heard redistribution of wealth and you assumed that must mean to absolutely equalize all wealth, which of course would be absurd. What we're actually talking about in the US in terms of poverty amelioration is less than half of one percent of our GDP. The countries that have essentially managed to eliminate poverty spend about 1% of their GDP on it. Nothing remotely like totally evening out all the money so everybody makes the same of course. But because you approached it in binary mode, you jumped to that assumption (if it isn't 0, it must be 1), and then reacted to that absurd notion instead of the actual concept we're discussing. Anyways, that is a longwinded explanation, but it happens all the time. Literally many times every single day. It is, by far, the biggest difficulty conservatives on a whole struggle with in debating these issues. If the right could just get over that one problem the whole world would take a massive step forwards. The end of bumperstickerism!
Click to expand...

If everybody is rich, nobody is rich.
 
teamosil said:
Well, many, maybe even most, folks on the right seem to have trouble dealing with concepts that are not simplistic absolutes. What you did there, for example, was heard redistribution of wealth and you assumed that must mean to absolutely equalize all wealth, which of course would be absurd. What we're actually talking about in the US in terms of poverty amelioration is less than half of one percent of our GDP. The countries that have essentially managed to eliminate poverty spend about 1% of their GDP on it. Nothing remotely like totally evening out all the money so everybody makes the same of course. But because you approached it in binary mode, you jumped to that assumption (if it isn't 0, it must be 1), and then reacted to that absurd notion instead of the actual concept we're discussing. Anyways, that is a longwinded explanation, but it happens all the time. Literally many times every single day. It is, by far, the biggest difficulty conservatives on a whole struggle with in debating these issues. If the right could just get over that one problem the whole world would take a massive step forwards. The end of bumperstickerism!
Click to expand...

nothing gets older than those who constantly demand more government and more wealth redistribution assuming airs that those of us who don't buy into your assumptions and welfare socialist cravings are somehow less intelligent than you are.

I realize that part of the myth that liberalism depends on is that elite libs are so much smarter than the masses that the elite must be given the power to run the lives of the benighted.

You can call this crap poverty amelioration but the fact remains we spend a lot more than 1 percent on handouts and that includes all the crap that the indolent middle class has come to expect-such as paying artificially low federal income taxes for the stuff they demand.

the fact is, we have too much government

we have too many people who expect too much from government

and far too many people who expect others to pay for what they want from government
 
TurtleDude said:
ask most corporate shareholders what they want-high taxes taken from THEM so the dems can buy votes of the poor and that the poor can buy stuff with our money, or a society where there are less dependents, less suckers of the public teat and less pimps in office
Click to expand...


Or you ask them if they want to see profits decline:shrug:
 
TurtleDude said:
You can call this crap poverty amelioration but the fact remains we spend a lot more than 1 percent on handouts and that includes all the crap that the indolent middle class has come to expect-such as paying artificially low federal income taxes for the stuff they demand.
Click to expand...

And just exactly what stuff is that TD?
 
TurtleDude said:
nothing gets older than those who constantly demand more government and more wealth redistribution assuming airs that those of us who don't buy into your assumptions and welfare socialist cravings are somehow less intelligent than you are.

I realize that part of the myth that liberalism depends on is that elite libs are so much smarter than the masses that the elite must be given the power to run the lives of the benighted.

You can call this crap poverty amelioration but the fact remains we spend a lot more than 1 percent on handouts and that includes all the crap that the indolent middle class has come to expect-such as paying artificially low federal income taxes for the stuff they demand.

the fact is, we have too much government

we have too many people who expect too much from government

and far too many people who expect others to pay for what they want from government
Click to expand...

Oh look, you're still unable to come up with any evidence for your claim or any counter for my evidence... SHOCKER!
 
winston53660 said:
Government decides what shareholders want?
Click to expand...

Government continues supplying the poor with those cell phones, refrigerators, etc. so the shareholders have no choice but to go along with it.
 
TurtleDude said:
you don't know how many idiotic regulations US corporations are exposed to
Click to expand...

So you don't even know what you are bitching and moaning about.

In the mean time you like to brag about how rich you are:roll:
 
teamosil said:
Oh look, you're still unable to come up with any evidence for your claim or any counter for my evidence... SHOCKER!
Click to expand...

I don't recall seeing any proof from you other than lame platitudes

remind me why more government is better.
 
zgoldsmith23 said:
Government continues supplying the poor with those cell phones, refrigerators, etc. so the shareholders have no choice but to go along with it.
Click to expand...

Wait a second government is supplying cell phones now? First I've ever heard of that....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom