What is a person entitled to demand having for free - paid for by other people working for them?

[TurtleDude]

Democrats are the party of the working class. Democrats are in favor of labor unions. Democrats argue for increasing minimum wage and holding big corporations accountable for their actions. It is the Republicans who promote trickle down economics which benefits the rich at the expense of the working class. It is Republicans who seek to eliminate workers' unions and regulations that protect the working man from exploitation. Your consumption of right wing propaganda has twisted your understanding of the U.S. political parties.

Actually the Democrats are the party of big government, and those who use big government to become very rich.

 

[TurtleDude]

Also, could you tell me why we should make a single mother of two work 8 hours a day running a cash register for $7/hour when it costs her $10/hr to send her two kids to day care? If a day care can charge $10/hour to watch your kids for you and that's considered legitimate work then why don't you consider a single mother watching her own children 24 hours a day to be "working?"

Why are single women continually having children that they are not able to provide for?

 

[MrWonka]

The death penalty is 100% a deterrent.

Then why are murder rates actually higher instates with the death penalty than they are in states without?

There is not even ONE case of anyone who was executed murdering anyone else after the execution.

So you don't actually know what the word "deterrent" means.

Also, studies have shown that approximately 1 out of every 16 people on death row is actually innocent of the crimes they were convicted of. Meanwhile, you would be hard pressed to find an example of anybody who was sentenced to life in prison without parole murdering anyone outside of prison once they were sent there. Particularly not in the age of Super Max prisons. So sentencing them to life in prison instead of the death penalty would actually result in fewer murders of innocent people when you realized that we ourselves are murdering innocent people that we're convinced are actually guilty.

There are many instances of people with a life sentence murdering someone else (in prison).

Generally, people sentenced to life are in prison with others sentenced to life so if someone is murdered in prison odds are high that the murdered person was also a murderer.

DUI massive fines and potential imprisonment does stop some people from driving drunk.

Meh... not really. Most of the people responsible enough to be dissuaded by fines were already responsible enough to not be a danger in the first place. Furthermore, there are countless examples of people's lives being turned up side down for ticky tack DUI's when they weren't really a threat to anybody. Drunk Driving is an 80/20 problem. In fact I'd say it's more like a 90/10 problem were 90% of the problem is caused by only 10% of the population, and that 10%(mostly rural Trump supporters by the way) are too belligerent and arrogant to let the police tell them when they're okay to drive so it really doesn't do a whole lot of good.

 

[lwf]

Actually the Democrats are the party of big government, and those who use big government to become very rich.

Flat wrong. The Republican Party is the party of the rich. They want small government because they see the government as standing in the way of their profits, what with things like minimum wage, labor unions, income and property tax, and environmental regulations. Big government does not make the rich richer. Or rather, it decreases the rate at which the super rich accumulate more wealth. It sacrifices a small amount of the profits of the top 1% so that we can have a middle class in this country. Blue collar folks who vote republican because they are convinced that they are the party of the working man are the victims of right wing propaganda and are voting against their own interests.

 

[jeffchap]

Why are single women continually having children that they are not able to provide for?

Because we pay them to do so.

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

 

[joko104]

Because we pay them to do so.

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

True. It has been made a valid career decision that now can pay much more than working a full time job. Then just let the kids run the street and there is no work involved.

 

[joko104]

Flat wrong. The Republican Party is the party of the rich. They want small government because they see the government as standing in the way of their profits, what with things like minimum wage, labor unions, income and property tax, and environmental regulations. Big government does not make the rich richer. Or rather, it decreases the rate at which the super rich accumulate more wealth. It sacrifices a small amount of the profits of the top 1% so that we can have a middle class in this country. Blue collar folks who vote republican because they are convinced that they are the party of the working man are the victims of right wing propaganda and are voting against their own interests.

NO ONE in the Democratic Party ever proposes closing tax loopholes for the super rich. Because of loopholes, the tax rate is irrelevant.

Blue collar workers have many, many reasons to vote Republican. Top of the list is the Democratic Party doing everything it can to flood the country with no-skill and low-skill illegal Latino migrants who will work off the clock for cash for far less wages - while they also drive up housing costs.

 

[lwf]

NO ONE in the Democratic Party ever proposes closing tax loopholes for the super rich. Because of loopholes, the tax rate is irrelevant.

Blue collar workers have many, many reasons to vote Republican. Top of the list is the Democratic Party doing everything it can to flood the country with no-skill and low-skill illegal Latino migrants who will work off the clock for cash for far less wages - while they also drive up housing costs.

The Republican Party is the party that approves of outsourcing American jobs to people who will work for less. Republicans rely way too much on corporate lobbying to ever put a stop to that. Democrats are not pro-illegal immigration, regardless of what your right wing conspiracy sites claim. Rather, by campaigning for a wall that will do nothing to reduce illegal immigration solely because Trump promised it, Republicans show exactly what they think of illegal immigration: They are fine with it as long as they are in charge.

 

[Vadinho]

It depends on what kind of society you want to live in. At the core of this question is the value of a life versus the value of a dollar. If you value your dollar more then the life of another, the choice is simple is it not? If you value the life of a person more then the dollar in your pocket, the choice is easy. Other nations do not consider money or the ability to earn money a criteria for judging a life. We are a very rich nation.

 

[TurtleDude]

Then why are murder rates actually higher instates with the death penalty than they are in states without?


So you don't actually know what the word "deterrent" means.

Also, studies have shown that approximately 1 out of every 16 people on death row is actually innocent of the crimes they were convicted of. Meanwhile, you would be hard pressed to find an example of anybody who was sentenced to life in prison without parole murdering anyone outside of prison once they were sent there. Particularly not in the age of Super Max prisons. So sentencing them to life in prison instead of the death penalty would actually result in fewer murders of innocent people when you realized that we ourselves are murdering innocent people that we're convinced are actually guilty.


Generally, people sentenced to life are in prison with others sentenced to life so if someone is murdered in prison odds are high that the murdered person was also a murderer.


Meh... not really. Most of the people responsible enough to be dissuaded by fines were already responsible enough to not be a danger in the first place. Furthermore, there are countless examples of people's lives being turned up side down for ticky tack DUI's when they weren't really a threat to anybody. Drunk Driving is an 80/20 problem. In fact I'd say it's more like a 90/10 problem were 90% of the problem is caused by only 10% of the population, and that 10%(mostly rural Trump supporters by the way) are too belligerent and arrogant to let the police tell them when they're okay to drive so it really doesn't do a whole lot of good.

I am not a supporter of the death penalty because there is that chance of mistake. Someone doing a life sentence who then kills is an exception since the life sentence did not deter him. I note that liberals often correctly note that the DP is not a deterrent (even though there are other reasons to support the DP) but are often big fans of gun laws, which are even less of an deterrent.

 

[TurtleDude]

Flat wrong. The Republican Party is the party of the rich. They want small government because they see the government as standing in the way of their profits, what with things like minimum wage, labor unions, income and property tax, and environmental regulations. Big government does not make the rich richer. Or rather, it decreases the rate at which the super rich accumulate more wealth. It sacrifices a small amount of the profits of the top 1% so that we can have a middle class in this country. Blue collar folks who vote republican because they are convinced that they are the party of the working man are the victims of right wing propaganda and are voting against their own interests.

Complete BS talking points. The Democrat party is full of people who use government office to become filthy rich-usually by bamboozling the uneducated with claims that these big government fat cats are going to give the sheeple money taken from the rich.

You seem to think that working people are best served by more government, more dependency and less self reliance. That doesnt' serve anyone but those who gain power by having a perma-class of dependent voters.

 

[TurtleDude]

It depends on what kind of society you want to live in. At the core of this question is the value of a life versus the value of a dollar. If you value your dollar more then the life of another, the choice is simple is it not? If you value the life of a person more then the dollar in your pocket, the choice is easy. Other nations do not consider money or the ability to earn money a criteria for judging a life. We are a very rich nation.

Does merely existing create a just claim on the property, time, or wealth of others?

 

[TurtleDude]

Because we pay them to do so.

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

Yep, a scheme the democrats came up with, to cultivate and expand a dependent class that votes for them

 

[lwf]

Complete BS talking points. The Democrat party is full of people who use government office to become filthy rich-usually by bamboozling the uneducated with claims that these big government fat cats are going to give the sheeple money taken from the rich.

You seem to think that working people are best served by more government, more dependency and less self reliance. That doesnt' serve anyone but those who gain power by having a perma-class of dependent voters.

It's the truth and we have the history of this country as proof. The government is "of the people." It's purpose is to make the country a better place for EVERYONE, not just the elite. "Trickle down economics" (found in a conservative government) is a self-defeating system. It takes a healthy economy and drains it until it dries up while making the top 1% rich beyond their wildest dreams. "Trickle up economics" (found in a liberal democratic government) is sustainable. It puts money into the hands of consumers and this money trickles up to the job creators, who then create more jobs, which creates more consumers, and brings the job creators more money. Everyone wins when the working man is taken care of.

Individualistic self-reliance is nice and a good trait to have when you live in the wilderness and provide for yourself and your family. I applaud and admire those who can do this. But we live in an interdependent society of people who cannot survive without the help of other people. A government based on individual self-reliance is obsolete and makes no sense in 2019. The time for "every man for himself" has passed in this world. Interdependence is the norm now, and humans are a social species. Individuals are welcome to retreat from society into the woods and scratch out a living in the trees, but if you want to benefit from the huge advantage of working a 9-5 job in a society of human beings who are taking care of you as much as you are taking care of them, you have to contribute your fair share to help those who are struggling.

 

[TurtleDude]

It's the truth and we have the history of this country as proof. The government is "of the people." It's purpose is to make the country a better place for EVERYONE, not just the elite. "Trickle down economics" (found in a conservative government) is a self-defeating system. It takes a healthy economy and drains it until it dries up while making the top 1% rich beyond their wildest dreams. "Trickle up economics" (found in a liberal democratic government) is sustainable. It puts money into the hands of consumers and this money trickles up to the job creators, who then create more jobs, which creates more consumers, and brings the job creators more money. Everyone wins when the working man is taken care of.

Individualistic self-reliance is nice and a good trait to have when you live in the wilderness and provide for yourself and your family. I applaud and admire those who can do this. But we live in an interdependent society of people who cannot survive without the help of other people. A government based on individual self-reliance is obsolete and makes no sense in 2019. The time for "every man for himself" has passed in this world. Interdependence is the norm now, and humans are a social species. Individuals are welcome to retreat from society into the woods and scratch out a living in the trees, but if you want to benefit from the huge advantage of working a 9-5 job in a society of human beings who are taking care of you as much as you are taking care of them, you have to contribute your fair share to help those who are struggling.

What is a fair share to pay to someone who is struggling? It sounds wonderful but what it really is, is a ploy by greedy politicians to buy votes and wealth.

 

[lwf]

What is a fair share to pay to someone who is struggling? It sounds wonderful but what it really is, is a ploy by greedy politicians to buy votes and wealth.

The fact that corporate lobbyists exist and have more money than the Republican politicians they lobby shows that this is a naive assumption.

Are Democratic politicians perfect angels? Of course not. Are many of them corrupt? Of course. Just like Republican politicians. But the policies of the Democratic Party benefit the working class over the wealthy. Republican policies benefit the wealthy at the expense of the working class. Nothing is more insulting than a Republican politician arguing that he or she will give a tiny fraction of a percent tax break to the working class while giving a gigantic tax break to corporations and eliminating regulations that protect those working class people from being screwed by those very corporations. It's a shame that so many conservatives fall into this trap and trade a few hundred dollars in taxes for higher insurance premiums and less frequent raises.

 

[Vadinho]

Does merely existing create a just claim on the property, time, or wealth of others?

Does merely existing create a claim to pay taxes? It does in a society. You seem to think that you personally pay for everything that comes out of the government. Let us say you do. Say you pay 20 grand a year in federal taxes. Does it change your life if your contribution to helping others is 5, 50, 100 bucks? If it does, you are one cruel person. Now you may counter that your line of support is a grand. Once you start paying more then a grand a year you get righteous and start stomping your feet. Is paying a grand a year to insure that the people around you are not on the street, miserable, penniless and sick not a good deal?

 

[HumblePi]

While Democrats support social benefits to those in need, conservatives are absolutely obsessed with directing huge monetary benefits to their favored constituencies — namely, the rich.

 

[Waddy]

Nothing should be given for free. Anything a person needs to survive should be available, and a work requirement to go along with it.

 

[TurtleDude]

The fact that corporate lobbyists exist and have more money than the Republican politicians they lobby shows that this is a naive assumption.

Are Democratic politicians perfect angels? Of course not. Are many of them corrupt? Of course. Just like Republican politicians. But the policies of the Democratic Party benefit the working class over the wealthy. Republican policies benefit the wealthy at the expense of the working class. Nothing is more insulting than a Republican politician arguing that he or she will give a tiny fraction of a percent tax break to the working class while giving a gigantic tax break to corporations and eliminating regulations that protect those working class people from being screwed by those very corporations. It's a shame that so many conservatives fall into this trap and trade a few hundred dollars in taxes for higher insurance premiums and less frequent raises.

Who pays most of the taxes? the top 10% pay more than 70% of the income taxes. Let's get rid of the class warfare designed income tax then you won't complain when the top tax payers get the most breaks. Right now, the top 1% pay a higher share of the income tax than at any other time

 

[TurtleDude]

Does merely existing create a claim to pay taxes? It does in a society. You seem to think that you personally pay for everything that comes out of the government. Let us say you do. Say you pay 20 grand a year in federal taxes. Does it change your life if your contribution to helping others is 5, 50, 100 bucks? If it does, you are one cruel person. Now you may counter that your line of support is a grand. Once you start paying more then a grand a year you get righteous and start stomping your feet. Is paying a grand a year to insure that the people around you are not on the street, miserable, penniless and sick not a good deal?

the fact is, the lower and middle classes don't have a proper understanding how expensive government is, because they don't get proper feedback in terms of tax rates.

 

[SDET]

Also, could you tell me why we should make a single mother of two work 8 hours a day running a cash register for $7/hour when it costs her $10/hr to send her two kids to day care? If a day care can charge $10/hour to watch your kids for you and that's considered legitimate work then why don't you consider a single mother watching her own children 24 hours a day to be "working?"

That single mother, with few exceptions, shouldn't have driven the man out of her life.

 

[SDET]

Does merely existing create a claim to pay taxes? It does in a society. You seem to think that you personally pay for everything that comes out of the government. Let us say you do. Say you pay 20 grand a year in federal taxes. Does it change your life if your contribution to helping others is 5, 50, 100 bucks? If it does, you are one cruel person. Now you may counter that your line of support is a grand. Once you start paying more then a grand a year you get righteous and start stomping your feet. Is paying a grand a year to insure that the people around you are buying drugs not on the street, miserable, penniless and sick not a good deal?

There, fixed it for ya'.

 

[Lakryte]

You mean free stuff life police and fire services, and transportation infrastructure?

 

[Lakryte]

Nothing should be given for free. Anything a person needs to survive should be available, and a work requirement to go along with it.

So people who are out of work should not be allowed to call the police if someone is assaulting them? Or shouldn't be allowed to use public roads?