OT: Politics Thread - Do Not Open Unless You Want to Argue

[Comeds]

I predicted years ago that the US would be history by 2025 and I see no reason to change my date. Its an economic house of cards.

They have to raise the debt ceiling, hopefully there are conditions with the plan they come up with. Not passing it will hurt a lot of things and people. What message would it send to not ensure that seniors and some poor people get the checks they may need when we bailed out some huge corporations that helped us into the mess we are in?

I am OK with a flat tax as long as all loopholes and tax shelters are closed. I am OK with some paying a higher percentage as it is now due to the way its possible to avoid paying ones taxes.

As far as welfare and social reforms, I am OK with that but I think it will always be around. I wonder even assuming everyone works hard is it possible economically that there would be no poor people and no need for public assistance? Maybe we have a board economist who would know, my guess would be no as I am not sure our economy could sustain itself if everyone was successful.

 

[dash]

Canada claims Washington state, Oregon, Idaho, and Alaska - That's right, we want oil, apples, potatoes, and birkenstock sandals.

 

[dare2be]

So Jeffersonian.

Can we draw the new map based on the new NHL divisions?

FUCK DAL

 

[elocomotive]

As far as welfare and social reforms, I am OK with that but I think it will always be around. I wonder even assuming everyone works hard is it possible economically that there would be no poor people and no need for public assistance? Maybe we have a board economist who would know, my guess would be no as I am not sure our economy could sustain itself if everyone was successful.

Not in a capitalist system. And not when you have a certain amount of "natural unemployment" anyway.

The key is to make the system a safety net, not a lifestyle, which is what a lot of reform in the 90s accomplished. The truth is only about $90 billion was spent on unemployment benefits and another $60 billionish on housing benefits. Compare that with $850 billion on Medicare/Medicaid, $750 billion for pensions, and $850 billion on defense spending. Welfare is small potatoes compared to those other major areas.

 

[Comeds]

FUCK DAL

The Republic Of Texas would be its own country. That ones easy.

 

[dare2be]

The Republic Of Texas would be its own country. That ones easy.

I was referring to eloco's map

 

[awaz]

Not in a capitalist system. And not when you have a certain amount of "natural unemployment" anyway.

The key is to make the system a safety net, not a lifestyle, which is what a lot of reform in the 90s accomplished. The truth is only about $90 billion was spent on unemployment benefits and another $60 billionish on housing benefits. Compare that with $850 billion on Medicare/Medicaid, $750 billion for pensions, and $850 billion on defense spending. Welfare is small potatoes compared to those other major areas.

bingo.

 

[huskers1217]

Not in a capitalist system. And not when you have a certain amount of "natural unemployment" anyway.

The key is to make the system a safety net, not a lifestyle, which is what a lot of reform in the 90s accomplished. The truth is only about $90 billion was spent on unemployment benefits and another $60 billionish on housing benefits. Compare that with $850 billion on Medicare/Medicaid, $750 billion for pensions, and $850 billion on defense spending. Welfare is small potatoes compared to those other major areas.

rep. I think (or hope) we all can agree on this.

 

[elocomotive]

I was referring to eloco's map

Hee hee.

 

[awaz]

Oo politics!

Read a lot on here already about welfare reform and eloco hit it on the head. it needs to be a safety net, not a lifestyle. there are way too many people out there who have mailed it in and have decided to live on welfare the rest of their lives. welfar needs to provide money to keep people alive, but it also needs to educate people into being worthy job candidates. have people on welfare go to technical schools and learn blue collar jobs so that they are at least employable. i know there are people that end up on welfare that are well educated, but sometimes what they are educated in won't get them hired. they need to educate these people in a skill, and get them in the work force so they can provide for themselves. providing them money to do what they want with it is not a way to encourage their personal development. it kills all drive after a while and people resort to their welfare checks the rest of their lives.

topic 2:
the government needs to stop defending its people from being stupid and hurting themselves. there are so many laws out there to protect people from causing harm to themselves, such as drugs, seat belts, etc. the big one here is drug enforcement. legalize it. if people are dumb enough to use and abuse, then they die. its morbid, but its simple. you dont want to wear a seatbelt? then you die. the government wastes so much time and money enforcing laws that dont need to be enforced. legalize ALL drugs, and sell them like they sell hard liquor in most states. have a government store and tax the crap out of it. you're turning a million dollar expense into a million dollar revenue. not to mention all the people that the government pays to keep alive in jail. i dont know what the number is but i'm sure its a very high percentage of inmates are in because of drug violations. if all the drugs are legal you effectively kill drug trafficking which cuts off the profitability of 'living on the streets', putting people back in the work-force and taking them off welfare!

it will probably never happen, because there are too many people out there that assume if someone does heroin they are going to go on a killing spree. but i think its a valid way to not only cut cost, but increase revenue and drive crime down, all at the same time. and i dont mean it will drive crime down because you're making the crime legal, i'm talking about all the gang shootings that go on because of drug trafficking.

the government is there to protect innocent civilians from each other, it shouldn't be protecting individuals from themselves. all drugs, and alcohol really, should be treated the way smoking is right now. they should advertise why these things are bad for you, and they should tax the crap out of them. then people are warned, and the decision is there's if they want to fuck up their lives.

 

[Voltaire26]

Here is something most people fail to realize; we pay more for local government than the federal government. Consolidation of local governments (cities, townships, etc) should be merged into counties. This would reduced a lot of waste (at the top) and allow our governments to run smoother.

Young people graduating from high school should serve two years in either the Military, National Guard, Peace Corp or Emergency Response Team.

These are complex ideas that are simplified into two shot paragraphs. Our US Constitution is an excellent document. State Constitutions and local charters need to be changed. Just one man's opinion, but we all have to think out of the box and reinvent government. I address this on a Political Forum.

http://www.sportshoopla.com/forums/...thoughts-government-foolishness-andwaste.html

 

[elocomotive]

To my point above, I was trying to say I think Welfare is in pretty good shape these days. That are max. limits and things that didn't use to exist.

But it's easier to beat the political drum against lazy, poor people (stereotypes, what politicians say, not my own opinion) who don't contribute to the tax base than it is to take on grandma's medical care, the military-industrial complex, or reforming the pension system millions of government workers rely on. The truth is those last three are combined 30 times the size of Welfare.

What we need are leaders willing to take on those big issues and come up with fair but responsible solutions. It takes balls. Whether or not you like Obama's health care plan (I have mixed feelings), give him credit for taking on a huge problem we need to face that was certainly not going to up his popularity regardless of how it came out. On the other side, we need Americans who aren't dumb as fuck and recognize that with a huge debt, reduced spending and increased taxes are necessary to bring that back under control.

And we need a media that doesn't fill the 24/7 news cycle with buzz words that have people diehard for or against something without even knowing what it's about. I'm not sure how we get a more responsible citizenry when people use TV news as their primary source and it's about 97% garbage.

 

[elocomotive]

Oo politics!

Read a lot on here already about welfare reform and eloco hit it on the head. it needs to be a safety net, not a lifestyle. there are way too many people out there who have mailed it in and have decided to live on welfare the rest of their lives.

No, I was saying Welfare has been reformed and we focus on it too much instead of the bigger, more serious areas of spending that would actually impact our debt situation.

 

[jerseyjigroe]

To my point above, I was trying to say I think Welfare is in pretty good shape these days. That are max. limits and things that didn't use to exist.

But it's easier to beat the political drum against lazy, poor people (stereotypes, what politicians say, not my own opinion) who don't contribute to the tax base than it is to take on grandma's medical care, the military-industrial complex, or reforming the pension system millions of government workers rely on. The truth is those last three are combined 30 times the size of Welfare.

What we need are leaders willing to take on those big issues and come up with fair but responsible solutions. It takes balls. Whether or not you like Obama's health care plan (I have mixed feelings), give him credit for taking on a huge problem we need to face that was certainly not going to up his popularity regardless of how it came out. On the other side, we need Americans who aren't dumb as fuck and recognize that with a huge debt, reduced spending and increased taxes are necessary to bring that back under control.

And we need a media that doesn't fill the 24/7 news cycle with buzz words that have people diehard for or against something without even knowing what it's about. I'm not sure how we get a more responsible citizenry when people use TV news as their primary source and it's about 97% garbage.

Instead of raising taxes, which is a terrible idea during a recession, we need to cut spending and increase the tax base...especially since almost half of the country doesn't pay federal income taxes.

Nearly half of US households escape fed income tax - Yahoo! Finance

 

[sabresfaninthesouth]

Oo politics!


topic 2:
the government needs to stop defending its people from being stupid and hurting themselves. there are so many laws out there to protect people from causing harm to themselves, such as drugs, seat belts, etc. the big one here is drug enforcement. legalize it. if people are dumb enough to use and abuse, then they die. its morbid, but its simple. you dont want to wear a seatbelt? then you die. the government wastes so much time and money enforcing laws that dont need to be enforced. legalize ALL drugs, and sell them like they sell hard liquor in most states. have a government store and tax the crap out of it. you're turning a million dollar expense into a million dollar revenue. not to mention all the people that the government pays to keep alive in jail. i dont know what the number is but i'm sure its a very high percentage of inmates are in because of drug violations. if all the drugs are legal you effectively kill drug trafficking which cuts off the profitability of 'living on the streets', putting people back in the work-force and taking them off welfare!

it will probably never happen, because there are too many people out there that assume if someone does heroin they are going to go on a killing spree. but i think its a valid way to not only cut cost, but increase revenue and drive crime down, all at the same time. and i dont mean it will drive crime down because you're making the crime legal, i'm talking about all the gang shootings that go on because of drug trafficking.

the government is there to protect innocent civilians from each other, it shouldn't be protecting individuals from themselves. all drugs, and alcohol really, should be treated the way smoking is right now. they should advertise why these things are bad for you, and they should tax the crap out of them. then people are warned, and the decision is there's if they want to fuck up their lives.

The problem with some of the items that are considered protecting people from themselves, like seatbelts, is that there is a greater consideration. If some dumbass kills himself because he's not wearing a seatbelt, there's a good chance we all pay a portion of that, because we have to pay for ambulances, coroners, paramedics, etc., not to mention the lost productivity and wasted fuel from people who are now stuck in traffic while they scrape some guy's brains off the pavement and the mental scarring that happens to the other cars and people involved in these accidents.

Same thing with smoking. People argue it's their health and their choice, but we all subsidize the cost of their healthcare if they get cancer or something similar.

Just a couple examples, but my point is that there're very few activities that one person can do that doesn't directly impact someone else in some way, which is why those regulations exist.

 

[jerseyjigroe]

No, I was saying Welfare has been reformed and we focus on it too much instead of the bigger, more serious areas of spending that would actually impact our debt situation.

Unless we're willing to take on medicare and social security the money problems will persist.

 

[SLY]

To my point above, I was trying to say I think Welfare is in pretty good shape these days. That are max. limits and things that didn't use to exist.

But it's easier to beat the political drum against lazy, poor people (stereotypes, what politicians say, not my own opinion) who don't contribute to the tax base than it is to take on grandma's medical care, the military-industrial complex, or reforming the pension system millions of government workers rely on. The truth is those last three are combined 30 times the size of Welfare.

What we need are leaders willing to take on those big issues and come up with fair but responsible solutions. It takes balls. Whether or not you like Obama's health care plan (I have mixed feelings), give him credit for taking on a huge problem we need to face that was certainly not going to up his popularity regardless of how it came out. On the other side, we need Americans who aren't dumb as fuck and recognize that with a huge debt, reduced spending and increased taxes are necessary to bring that back under control.

And we need a media that doesn't fill the 24/7 news cycle with buzz words that have people diehard for or against something without even knowing what it's about. I'm not sure how we get a more responsible citizenry when people use TV news as their primary source and it's about 97% garbage.

I dont think "Grandmas medical care" should be touched. Nor do I believe our defense should be hindered. However the pension plans and benefits of government officials and state workers needs to be drastically cut. And as far as welfare only taking up a portion, it still is a waste the way it is run. Every state should have it mandatory to pass a drug test to be on any state aid (Welfare, Food Stamps, anything and everything).

The benefits that retirees paid into their whole life should not be touched. If anything is going to be changed then it should be for the younger generation today. Those that lived their lives paying into something they depend on should have it.

 

[sabresfaninthesouth]

As far as welfare and social reforms, I am OK with that but I think it will always be around. I wonder even assuming everyone works hard is it possible economically that there would be no poor people and no need for public assistance? Maybe we have a board economist who would know, my guess would be no as I am not sure our economy could sustain itself if everyone was successful.

Not possible in a free market. Inflation sees to that, because there will always be a difference between the richest people in society and the poorest, and even when the poorest have more money, the higher demand for a product/service is going to drive up the price and put that same product/service out of reach of the poor once again.

 

[Voltaire26]

To my point above, I was trying to say I think Welfare is in pretty good shape these days. That are max. limits and things that didn't use to exist.

But it's easier to beat the political drum against lazy, poor people (stereotypes, what politicians say, not my own opinion) who don't contribute to the tax base than it is to take on grandma's medical care, the military-industrial complex, or reforming the pension system millions of government workers rely on. The truth is those last three are combined 30 times the size of Welfare.

What we need are leaders willing to take on those big issues and come up with fair but responsible solutions. It takes balls. Whether or not you like Obama's health care plan (I have mixed feelings), give him credit for taking on a huge problem we need to face that was certainly not going to up his popularity regardless of how it came out. On the other side, we need Americans who aren't dumb as fuck and recognize that with a huge debt, reduced spending and increased taxes are necessary to bring that back under control.

And we need a media that doesn't fill the 24/7 news cycle with buzz words that have people diehard for or against something without even knowing what it's about. I'm not sure how we get a more responsible citizenry when people use TV news as their primary source and it's about 97% garbage.

It's difficult to have leaders and massive overbearing 24 hour news channels. Eliminating or censoring the news channels would be worse. I don't know what the answers are. Obama has my support, Bush had my support and I will support the next president. For us to have effective leadership, we must allow people to lead.

 

[awaz]

No, I was saying Welfare has been reformed and we focus on it too much instead of the bigger, more serious areas of spending that would actually impact our debt situation.

oh.

well then i guess i dont agree with you quite as much haha. of course, i dont have too much background. my impression of welfare, as it stands now, is that people can live for the rest of their lives on it. which i think is wrong, and very costly to the government. like i said though, i dont have too much background