• 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
The government should have a program that allows student loan customers to refinance their loans. It is simply not practical to expect that the typical borrower will have the means to refinance a typical debt of $27,000. Even refinancing a tangible asset like a home is not simple these days. Ask Bernanke



Ben Bernanke turned down for mortgage refinancing

So you believe you have the right to do stupid things like borrow more than you can afford to repay, which you do, and the government and the taxpayer has the obligation to make you whole, which they don't.

Your argument is not that the government prevents you from refinancing your loan, but rather that the government should pick up part or all the costs incurred in the refinancing.
 
So you believe you have the right to do stupid things like borrow more than you can afford to repay, which you do, and the government and the taxpayer has the obligation to make you whole, which they don't.

Your argument is not that the government prevents you from refinancing your loan, but rather that the government should pick up part or all the costs incurred in the refinancing.
Free education, anyone? Let's keep money out of education.
 
Any democrat who wants these chamber of commerce democrats in office.Republicans who would call you a left wing extremist for not supporting so called moderates.

What you're talking about is not how 99.99% of threads on this forum shapes up. You are literally the only conservative I can think of who is regularly comfortable with breaking this mold and will actually take a decisive stand for policies that may potentially aid the the middle class at the expense of the rich. Go to any thread (again, where the interests of the rich are pitted against the interests of the poor/middle class) and you'll see that what I'm talking about is super consistent. Why even deny this?
 
Free education, anyone? Let's keep money out of education.

And how do you propose to do that? Buildings must be built, professors and bathroom cleaners must be hired, textbooks must be bought.

Ain't no free lunch. Somebody must foot the bill.
 
And how do you propose to do that? Buildings must be built, professors and bathroom cleaners must be hired, textbooks must be bought.

Ain't no free lunch. Somebody must foot the bill.
Well.. With communism.. Hehe.
 
Last edited:
Well.. With communism.. Hehe.

Sure. "From each acording to his own abilities, to each according to his needs"

The trouble is, under that system, there always tend to be more claimed needs than claimed abilities.

Ford invented the Ford because he wanted to drive a big fancy automobile. Not because he wanted to tool around in a little plain aitomobile.
 
Agreed. The reality is that it is the Democrats who are harming the middle class. They do so with their class warfare schemes. When they make a big play of socking it to the rich, they simply hope that most cannot workout that every time they sock it to the rich....the extra cost runs downhill and squarely hits the middle class in a higher cost of goods and services.

Any democrat who wants these chamber of commerce democrats in office.Republicans who would call you a left wing extremist for not supporting so called moderates.

See?? This is what I'm talking about. It's almost like there's a law that you're not even allowed to discuss income disparity or the middle class or jobs going overseas without the conversation being drowned out by accusations of "communism" or "class warfare" by the forum's conservatives. It's every ****ing thread.
 
See?? This is what I'm talking about. It's almost like there's a law that you're not even allowed to discuss income disparity or the middle class or jobs going overseas without the conversation being drowned out by accusations of "communism" or "class warfare" by the forum's conservatives. It's every ****ing thread.

What, are you new here? "Everything bad is because Democrats" is pretty much SOP on this forum.
 
What, are you new here? "Everything bad is because Democrats" is pretty much SOP on this forum.

This is different than a simple "we'll just blame the libruls for everything" mentality. What I'm talking about is there are actually discussions that certain groups will not permit to take place. Start a thread on anything touching on income disparity and it'll descend into a "class warfare" theme immediately. It's just a fact that conservatives have deemed this topic to be effectively verboten.

But you know what? I could be wrong. Maybe I'm reading the wrong threads or demonstrating a massive case of confirmation bias. So if there is a thread in which the business/rich interests are pitted against the interests of the poor/middle class and the conservative theme took the side of the latter, point me to it. I'd just like to see what that discussion would even look like, because at this point I've seen the tooth fairy more often than I've seen those discussions.

Edit: that challenge must be solely about rich/business vs. poor/middle class. It can't be framed around liberal vs. conservative, or Obama. It has to be about rich vs. non-rich only.
 
Last edited:
Hack thread is very hackish.

"Simplistic" is as far as I would go. Of course if you ask any conservative if they support the middle class they're going to say yes. But if you told them that supporting the middle class would result in corporations or the rich losing something in the bargain you're going to get a very different reaction.

It's like if you asked me if I support legal abortion. I'm going to say yes. But if you then add, "Ah, but what if for every abortion that takes place, a bag of live puppies is thrown into an incinerator?" then I'm probably going to change my vote. So yes, conservatives support the middle class, but only after the interests of the rich/corporations have been met and defended first. Find me a thread showing otherwise if you disagree. But like I already said in the post above yours, that challenge must be solely about rich/business vs. poor/middle class. It can't be framed around liberal vs. conservative, or Obama. It has to be about rich vs. non-rich only.
 
"Simplistic" is as far as I would go. Of course if you ask any conservative if they support the middle class they're going to say yes. But if you told them that supporting the middle class would result in corporations or the rich losing something in the bargain you're going to get a very different reaction.

It's like if you asked me if I support legal abortion. I'm going to say yes. But if you then add, "Ah, but what if for every abortion that takes place, a bag of live puppies is thrown into an incinerator?" then I'm probably going to change my vote. So yes, conservatives support the middle class, but only after the interests of the rich/corporations have been met and defended first. Find me a thread showing otherwise if you disagree. But like I already said in the post above yours, that challenge must be solely about rich/business vs. poor/middle class. It can't be framed around liberal vs. conservative, or Obama. It has to be about rich vs. non-rich only.

I guess we define "support" in different ways. Conservatives support the middle class by lowering taxes, and by fostering an economy in which everyone has an opportunity to rise and succeed.

Liberals want handouts and goodies for the poor at the expense of the wealthy. Conservatives believe that equality of opportunity is more important, and that rising tides raise all boats.

That, and there is also a social aspect we haven't touched on. Social conservatives fall in the mainstream on issues such as gay marriage, public religion, affirmative action, immigration policy, and gun rights. Liberals dictate what are seen as elitist views upon the masses from judicial benches and ivory towers - action that one could hardly argue "supports" the middle class.
 
I guess we define "support" in different ways. Conservatives support the middle class by lowering taxes, and by fostering an economy in which everyone has an opportunity to rise and succeed.

I disagree with the premise of that as it has proved itself demonstrably false, but that aside, if what you say is true (that you support the middle class, just in different ways), then you would see some semblance of variation from one thread to the next. Except there isn't variation. Rich vs. non-rich, conservative themes favor the rich every time, regardless of the discussion. If it was simply a disagreement on tax policy that would be one thing, but when you see the full weight of the conservative defense of the rich put behind issues such as net neutrality, progressive penalties, the right of employees to protest employer policies, (to name a few off the top of my head), a picture forms that shows the conservative philosophy isn't quite so nuanced.
 
Last edited:
I'm a little surprised nobody's taken me up on my challenge. It was kind of a ballsy challenge to make in the first place seeing as it can't be too hard to find one thread.
 
Sure. "From each acording to his own abilities, to each according to his needs"

The trouble is, under that system, there always tend to be more claimed needs than claimed abilities.

Ford invented the Ford because he wanted to drive a big fancy automobile. Not because he wanted to tool around in a little plain aitomobile.

That's a good point, but it really depends on the mentality of the individuals and how the needs/goods are distributed.
 
"Simplistic" is as far as I would go. Of course if you ask any conservative if they support the middle class they're going to say yes. But if you told them that supporting the middle class would result in corporations or the rich losing something in the bargain you're going to get a very different reaction.

There is a large difference between being against using one group of people for the benefit of another group of people and being against a whole group of people.
 
There is a large difference between being against using one group of people for the benefit of another group of people and being against a whole group of people.

Right, you're prioritizing the needs of one group over another. I'm not disputing that.
 
What, are you new here? "Everything bad is because Democrats" is pretty much SOP on this forum.

Sort of like the libruls screaming racism if Obama is criticised?
 
Right, you're prioritizing the needs of one group over another. I'm not disputing that.

This isn't about needs or priorities. This is about one group of people being abused so that another group of people can have something.
 
There is a large difference between being against using one group of people for the benefit of another group of people and being against a whole group of people.

This is the point I think some just don't see. Saying that Group A should not be forced to involuntarily provide for or service Group B is not at all the same thing as saying Group A doesn't care about Group B.
 
It would seem that a significant amount think that Republicans are not against helping the middle class. But I only see Republicans actively trying to destroy the middle class to pump up the rich just a little bit more.
Republican rich worship has reached an all new level and has become something more resembling a religion than an ideology.
Most Republicans live in mobile homes in my experience, yet they tend to want to give everything they can to the most wealthy and ONLY the most wealthy.

What I'd like to know is, "What have Republicans ever done for the middle class?" If they are not against the middle class then what have they actually done, ever?
 
So you believe you have the right to do stupid things like borrow more than you can afford to repay, which you do, and the government and the taxpayer has the obligation to make you whole, which they don't.

What you just put forward is very stupid and here's why. You are saying that I borrow more than I can afford to pay? Exactly how much have I borrowed? I want to dollar amount. Exactly how much do I make? I want the dollar amount. Furthermore, I am a taxpayer, and I have a right to say that the government should allow people to refinance their student loans.

Your argument is not that the government prevents you from refinancing your loan, but rather that the government should pick up part or all the costs incurred in the refinancing.

No that is not the argument at all. What you have made is another very stupid statement. I said the government should allow people to refinance their student loan debt. That does not mean that the government is preventing them from doing so. It means that the government should have a program that allows people the opportunity to refinance their debt at lower rates. It does not cost the government any money to refinance a loan at a lower rate, except maybe some administrative costs, that could be covered with a fee. The point of the government making student loans is to facilitate people getting an education, not to make money by gouging student loan customers with interest rates that are far in excess than what the government pays to borrow money.
 
It would seem that a significant amount think that Republicans are not against helping the middle class. But I only see Republicans actively trying to destroy the middle class to pump up the rich just a little bit more.
Republican rich worship has reached an all new level and has become something more resembling a religion than an ideology.
Most Republicans live in mobile homes in my experience, yet they tend to want to give everything they can to the most wealthy and ONLY the most wealthy.

What I'd like to know is, "What have Republicans ever done for the middle class?" If they are not against the middle class then what have they actually done, ever?

Greetings, Painter. :2wave:

Provide most of the jobs in this country for them? Now it's your turn - what do wealthy Democrats do for the middle class?
 
Back
Top Bottom