• 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
Yeah, that you assumed somebody in that situation would have friends and neighbors who have computers is a strikingly obvious indication that you don't know what the life they lead is like at all. No clue. I used to run a program that worked with kids in abject poverty in DC. We did a goal setting activity once where we asked them to name somebody they knew that had a job that they would like to have one day. All of them- every single one- struggled to come up with an answer and when we pushed them, we only got one of four responses from each of them: teacher, police officer, probation officer or person that works for a program that works with kids in abject poverty in DC. Those were the only people they knew who had jobs. The cops, their probation officers, their teachers and us. That was it. None of their relatives had jobs, none of their neighbors had jobs. Somebody who is on welfare can't afford a computer and most the people in their community didn't qualify for welfare because they didn't have kids or because they had already exhausted their 5 years, so they were pretty much scrounging for food. That's the world these sorts of programs are designed to work in, not a world where people have neighbors with computers.



That doesn't even mean anything. It's just an empty slogan. Responsibility does have anything to do with it. Our economic success as a country- all of ours- depends on getting as many people out of poverty as possible. The median American generates $3 million of GDP in their lifetime. If we can get a person out of poverty for anything less than $3 million, that's a net gain for the country. That means more employees, more customers, more inventions, more new companies being started... The US leaves huge amounts of money on the table for no reason by underfunding poverty amelioration. There are tons and tons of opportunities to increase our GDP by millions just by spending thousands and we don't take them because the slogans of the right prevent them from seeing it.

After a fairly serious illness where we were talking about things like a left ventricular assist devices (basically a pump that takes over for your hearts left ventricle) and a heart transplant I have entered into a State sponsored program of vocational rehabilitation. Now amazingly for every dollar spent on this program over the long term the state reaps four dollars in additional tax revenue.
 
Yeah, that you assumed somebody in that situation would have friends and neighbors who have computers is a strikingly obvious indication that you don't know what the life they lead is like at all. No clue. I used to run a program that worked with kids in abject poverty in DC. We did a goal setting activity once where we asked them to name somebody they knew that had a job that they would like to have one day. All of them- every single one- struggled to come up with an answer and when we pushed them, we only got one of four responses from each of them: teacher, police officer, probation officer or person that works for a program that works with kids in abject poverty in DC. Those were the only people they knew who had jobs. The cops, their probation officers, their teachers and us. That was it. None of their relatives had jobs, none of their neighbors had jobs. Somebody who is on welfare can't afford a computer and most the people in their community didn't qualify for welfare because they didn't have kids or because they had already exhausted their 5 years, so they were pretty much scrounging for food. That's the world these sorts of programs are designed to work in, not a world where people have neighbors with computers.

They had 5 years. Like I told winston, there are other options. Look for them hard enough and you will find them.

That doesn't even mean anything. It's just an empty slogan. Responsibility does have anything to do with it. Our economic success as a country- all of ours- depends on getting as many people out of poverty as possible. The median American generates $3 million of GDP in their lifetime. If we can get a person out of poverty for anything less than $3 million, that's a net gain for the country. That means more employees, more customers, more inventions, more new companies being started... The US leaves huge amounts of money on the table for no reason by underfunding poverty amelioration. There are tons and tons of opportunities to increase our GDP by millions just by spending thousands and we don't take them because the slogans of the right prevent them from seeing it.

:shock:
 
Telling them "Yes - we will provide you with a cell phone" is coddling it.

Next thing ya know the big bad government might try getting electricity to people in Tennessee!
 
do you know how much stuff is spent on the middle class that is paid for by people like me?
Do you know how much the middle class pays for government junk only the rich need?
 
Not my responsibility for them. They don't need international calling and, in terms of an employer, they can apply in person and check back later.
That's complete crap for many, many employers, now. A lot of employers, especially those on the low end where the minimum wage and unskilled labor jobs are, require a cell phone. You MIGHT be able to file an application in person (many companies put a terminal in their lobby) but if the cell phone number isn't filled in the application goes to File 13.
 
Last edited:
I have considered Bush Sr. to be a very good recent President, and Lincoln as great as far as early.
 
Do you know how much the middle class pays for government junk only the rich need?

well given the top 5% pay more taxes than the rest of the country, that's rather silly
 
That's complete crap for many, many employers, now. A lot of employers, especially those on the low end where the minimum wage and unskilled labor jobs are, require a cell phone. You MIGHT be able to file an application in person (many companies put a terminal in their lobby) but if the cell phone number isn't filled in the application goes to File 13.

Really? Because I've applied for many jobs and not one required a cell phone. For the past two years, I've gotten hired over email.
 
well given the top 5% pay more taxes than the rest of the country, that's rather silly
Not at all. There's a whole slew of crap most people in the middle class could care less about. You can start with most of the crap you dislike - because most middle class people aren't so hot about YOUR VERSION (not the real one) of the welfare state and many other things government does. Then you can add in - on top of all your objections - the huge military complex, the corporate protections, most foreign wars, and so on. So, yes, it wouldn't be too hard to get there at all.

We've been through this before, TD, and I'm not going through it again. I've laid out the basics only as a reminder to you of our past discussions.
 
Last edited:
Really? Because I've applied for many jobs and not one required a cell phone. For the past two years, I've gotten hired over email.
And who did you beg for computer time?

Things sure changed a lot on the last two years, then. I went looking for quite awhile in late 08-early 09 and a good 20% required a cell phone number. Almost all applications were required to be electronic - though as I mentioned earlier - many companies provided a terminal in their lobby.
 
Airports, especially small airports.
A $800 billion/year military.

small Airports help the middle class. I've used them several times.

the military spending can't be blamed on the wealthy, it is every day Americans that like to be the world power.
 
small Airports help the middle class. I've used them several times.
Then YOU should be paying for them, not me. I don't use airports. I have used air travel ONCE in 50+ years of living. What do I care about airports?

the military spending can't be blamed on the wealthy, it is every day Americans that like to be the world power.
And who tells the middle class that killing Iraqis, for instance, is what we like to do? I mean, really??? Did I miss the popular vote for war in 2003?
 
Last edited:
Then YOU should be paying for them, not me. I don't use airports. I have used air travel ONCE in 50+ years of living. What do I care about airports?

rich people would love the idea of making people pay for the services they use, which is not how it works today.

And who tells the middle class that killing Iraqis, for instance, is what we like to do? I mean, really??? Did I miss the popular vote for war in 2003?

the rich are no more interested in killing Iraqis. the entire nation went along with false intelligence, so blaming one class over the other seems pretty disingenuous.
 
rich people would love the idea of making people pay for the services they use, which is not how it works today.



the rich are no more interested in killing Iraqis. the entire nation went along with false intelligence, so blaming one class over the other seems pretty disingenuous.

You do have a point on both matters. However, to implement the first would simply be wrong and a betrayal of what it means to have a society. It would change the relationship of citizen and his government to that of the consumer in a retail shopping store.

The second can be true.... for some. However, there are corporation and their owners who benefit mightily from war - and have been doing so for a longtime all over the world. There are some who are more than willing to engage in foreign wars because - while it might mean red for the working class soldiers - it means green to them who build the bombs, tanks, weapons and everything else needed.

We used to say WAR IS GOOD BUSINESS - INVEST YOUR SON. But those for whom war is indeed good business, rarely do invest their sons - at least not today.
 
Flash forward to 2020+...

Rand Paul is the best US President (he might win when America falls apart and finally wakes up to the fact that those in power SUCK).

Even if he just does half of what he wants...he is better then all of the rest that I am aware of - on both sides.
 
My vote would be for Abe lincoln, but I wasn't even alive during that era, I can not properly judge him. Good president none the less.

Bill Clinton gets my vote
 
My vote would be for Abe lincoln, but I wasn't even alive during that era, I can not properly judge him. Good president none the less.

Bill Clinton gets my vote


Clinton was a very good president, took on many if the basic issues and was beaten down...but he could never have been effective...without Bush Sr.

Just as Obama would not been effective had Bush Jr. not screwed it all up.

Those that debase our current President, tend to ignore what he stepped into.



Put yourself in his shoes....and wonder what you might have done.
 
Back
Top Bottom