Bernie and Jane Sanders, under FBI investigation

[Wrathe]

Republicans like to blame "poor life decisions" on all kinds of things... Guy gets forcibly retired from his corporation in waves of layoffs, no union, little fallback -- poor life decisions. Teachers can barely get by on their income, debate going on strike... "poor life decisions" ... Someone says "hey, lets have free college for all of our kids;" ... oh HELL no, that's too expensive. But "hey, let's bomb Iraq?" Absolutely, we can't afford NOT to!!

I agree, isolationism and take care of our own problems?

 

[-Akronite-]

No one can argue against utopia, seriously. I mean no poor? No fear of death? That's amazing? Where do we all sign up? You think people DON'T want this? Honestly? You guys act like anyone who shares a conservative view doesn't want these things.

There is a lot of rhetoric like this, I'll admit. It doesn't help the GOP to combat this with the probable outcomes of this healthcare repeal. BUT I agree we all want what's best.

We disagree on how to get them.

Yes. And that's why I found it hilarious that someone would come in here high-horsing about taxes being theft. We're not robin hood literally trying to steal from the rich. The rich have far more power and influence in government, and we all get one vote. If the vote goes toward higher taxes to help the poor, that's not theft.

 

[Wrathe]

There is a lot of rhetoric like this, I'll admit. It doesn't help the GOP to combat this with the probable outcomes of this healthcare repeal. BUT I agree we all want what's best.



Yes. And that's why I found it hilarious that someone would come in here high-horsing about taxes being theft. We're not robin hood literally trying to steal from the rich. The rich have far more power and influence in government, and we all get one vote. If the vote goes toward higher taxes to help the poor, that's not theft.

The problem though, is "rich" is a sliding scale. It's not just the Dukes that are getting plundered (to continue the usage).
Surely though, you can understand the notion of theft one has on taxes. When all you hear are stories of government misspending, thousand dollar hammers and toilet seats, etc. That's frustrating. Then you take something like Planned Parenthood and drive government $ to something many feel is abhorrent, throw it and others in it's vein on the pile, and people are no matter paying for their own collective, but things they no longer believe in and don't want to fund.

How would you feel about an organization that for every $1 you spend, .98 cents gets used to feed the poor, .02 cents was used to kill a puppie. I mean, 98 cents on the dollar, that's amazing utilization by any margin, look at all the poor people who get fed. But I really love puppies, too!

Obviously, I'm being silly w/ the puppies, the idea is anything unsavory w/ the small margin of your money. Now this isn't to make this a PP issue. It's just an example.

The more the Govt has their hands in on, the more we will have conflicts like this. That's why so many feel we need to be doing things on a State level, and opposed to it on the Government level.

 

[DJTJ]

So are you making the argument that the government more efficiently wastes our money than whatever charities he'd respond back w/?

Just curious, is that data out there, the return of a $ when ran though the US government?

No. My arguement is that donating to charity doesn't mean you're side stepping waste, and if you're voluntarily giving to a place who misuse their funds, how hypocritical is it to call the government thieves when the end user abuses the system.

 

[Wrathe]

No. My arguement is that donating to charity doesn't mean you're side stepping waste, and if you're voluntarily giving to a place who misuse their funds, how hypocritical is it to call the government thieves when the end user abuses the system.

What's the difference between voluntarily giving to a place who misuse their funds vs the government doing it? Primarily, the voluntary part? Maybe I'm not understanding you correctly, as that seems obvious.

What do you mean about the end user abuses the system? Not following ya.

 

[DJTJ]

What's the difference between voluntarily giving to a place who misuse their funds vs the government doing it? Primarily, the voluntary part? Maybe I'm not understanding you correctly, as that seems obvious.

What do you mean about the end user abuses the system? Not following ya.

Blaming the government for the end user (recipient of aid) abusing the system, and calling it theft.

Giving money to a non/not for profit that openly doesn't assist people and call it charity.

Seems like a huge contradiction, right?

 

[-Akronite-]

The problem though, is "rich" is a sliding scale. It's not just the Dukes that are getting plundered (to continue the usage).
Surely though, you can understand the notion of theft one has on taxes. When all you hear are stories of government misspending, thousand dollar hammers and toilet seats, etc. That's frustrating. Then you take something like Planned Parenthood and drive government $ to something many feel is abhorrent, throw it and others in it's vein on the pile, and people are no matter paying for their own collective, but things they no longer believe in and don't want to fund.

How would you feel about an organization that for every $1 you spend, .98 cents gets used to feed the poor, .02 cents was used to kill a puppie. I mean, 98 cents on the dollar, that's amazing utilization by any margin, look at all the poor people who get fed. But I really love puppies, too!

Obviously, I'm being silly w/ the puppies, the idea is anything unsavory w/ the small margin of your money. Now this isn't to make this a PP issue. It's just an example.

The more the Govt has their hands in on, the more we will have conflicts like this. That's why so many feel we need to be doing things on a State level, and opposed to it on the Government level.

Well isn't it kind of crazy that the example you go to is Planned Parenthood? Not only is abortion a small portion of their work (including currently, 0% as a result of federal funding), but it's such a measly portion of the government's budget. Like that's seen as the most abhorrent waste of government money? Meanwhile, the same people that hate Planned Parenthood are cheering for increasing our astronomical military budget. Keep in mind, its not as if everyone in the country is behind all the actions of our military, but there seems to be no limit to the death and destruction they want to do.

So I'll vote towards decreasing the military budget in favor or education and welfare and others will vote differently. I just feel there is nothing to the argument that taxes are somehow theft and if you want to raise them to benefit people somehow you are ravaging the oh-so-defenseless rich in this country.

Not really sure what you're point is on the sliding scale. Nobody is making less money in this country by making more money.

 

[Wrathe]

Blaming the government for the end user (recipient of aid) abusing the system, and calling it theft.

Giving money to a non/not for profit that openly doesn't assist people and call it charity.

Seems like a huge contradiction, right?

So you were hoping to prove where he gives is less efficient than the Government? If I'm wrong, tell me, trying to understand the point. Is there data on how much waste there is by the Government per dollar to even make that comparison? Doesn't making that comparison miss the point of voluntarily vs involuntary?

Blaming the Gov for abuse at the end-user only makes sense because it's my (yours, ours) money being squandered. Obviously, if a private org wasted their own money, I don't care. We all have a dog in this fight once you go to our pockets to fund it, no? We being tax paying citizens of this country. You have to account for exploitation in the system though. Else, it's just a poor system. If it's a poor system designed by the Government, paid for by us through Taxation, and I'm not allowed to even question the Government on it's failed system? That feels a lot like taxation without representation, which naturally evokes certain passions.

 

[DJTJ]

So you were hoping to prove where he gives is less efficient than the Government? If I'm wrong, tell me, trying to understand the point. Is there data on how much waste there is by the Government per dollar to even make that comparison? Doesn't making that comparison miss the point of voluntarily vs involuntary?

Blaming the Gov for abuse at the end-user only makes sense because it's my (yours, ours) money being squandered. Obviously, if a private org wasted their own money, I don't care. We all have a dog in this fight once you go to our pockets to fund it, no? We being tax paying citizens of this country. You have to account for exploitation in the system though. Else, it's just a poor system. If it's a poor system designed by the Government, paid for by us through Taxation, and I'm not allowed to even question the Government on it's failed system? That feels a lot like taxation without representation, which naturally evokes certain passions.

Complaining about the end user in an entitlement program, but not placing blame on a "charity" is a massive contradiction.

You have no control over the first, you have every single percent of control on who you donate to.

If you're donating to a charity who uses, say 20% for direct aid, and you're throwing around how charitable you are, you're entirely missing the point, right?

You're assuming end user corruption, but are blatantly okay giving money to not assist up front? While throwing hot terms around because of your political party and calling taxation theft? Please.

 

[Wrathe]

Well isn't it kind of crazy that the example you go to is Planned Parenthood? Not only is abortion a small portion of their work (including currently, 0% as a result of federal funding), but it's such a measly portion of the government's budget. Like that's seen as the most abhorrent waste of government money? Meanwhile, the same people that hate Planned Parenthood are cheering for increasing our astronomical military budget. Keep in mind, its not as if everyone in the country is behind all the actions of our military, but there seems to be no limit to the death and destruction they want to do.

So I'll vote towards decreasing the military budget in favor or education and welfare and others will vote differently. I just feel there is nothing to the argument that taxes are somehow theft and if you want to raise them to benefit people somehow you are ravaging the oh-so-defenseless rich in this country.

Not really sure what you're point is on the sliding scale. Nobody is making less money in this country by making more money.

My point is just one conversation "the rich" is just the 1%, the next it's reaching into middle class further and further. I guess it doesn't matter, the bottom line is we're just rationalizing whose money we're OK spending for ourselves.

I specifically used PP as it's a high profile example that would resonate, and even qualified it as such to not make it a PP argument, it was just an example.

As for military spending, I agree, let's stop policing the world, come in, secure our own borders and take care of our own countries issues. I'm fine w/ that, but I keep being told that type of isolationism is awful. We're going into debt doing what we're doing now, so piling MORE onto the bottom line w/ no plan for funding it seems silly. So if you want to cut military, fine, do it, we bring our Troops home and we protect our borders only.

 

[Wrathe]

Complaining about the end user in an entitlement program, but not placing blame on a "charity" is a massive contradiction.

The only person actually MAKING the argument about contrasting efficiencies between the two is you, anyways. His point was never about efficiency, that was your tangent. I was just curious where you were going w/ it and if we actually had the data on our Government spending to even have that discussion.

 

[Wrathe]

So I'll vote towards decreasing the military budget in favor or education and welfare and others will vote differently.

What education are you referring to? I agree on national healthcare, I don't have a problem w/ the idea of welfare (obviously do w/ the application of it), but what do you mean in regards to education? Are you in on this, "Government pays for my college" kick? Or are you talking about improving basic education systems (K-12 as we know it)?

 

[-Akronite-]

Are you in on this, "Government pays for my college" kick? Or are you talking about improving basic education systems (K-12 as we know it)?

1) It's not a kick. I think public universities should be tuition free down the road.

2) My family paid for my college education because we were well off and "made good life decisions." Many of my peers who worked as hard if not harder than me have worse professional outlooks and severely high debt while I'm free of burden. I simply can't look at the state of things and conclude that the current system is the way to go. I'm not expecting everyone to agree with me.

3) Yes, I also want to improve K-12.

EDIT: I really thought you were going to make a point about the education provided by the military, which I think is massively important.

 

[-Akronite-]

My point is just one conversation "the rich" is just the 1%, the next it's reaching into middle class further and further. I guess it doesn't matter, the bottom line is we're just rationalizing whose money we're OK spending for ourselves.

That's the thing, you see it as selfish. Spending for ourselves. That's not how I see it. I am still young and not making that much money, but I'd vote for higher taxes to support programs like single-payer or tuition-free higher education. I intend on reaching a higher tax bracket in my professional career, and I'd like to think if I reached that level success I'd be just as willing to pay a larger share to help others. And that includes helping the poor which I never intend to be, paying education for students even though I have my degree, and helping the destitute get proper healthcare even though I have insurance provided by my employer.

It isn't just rationalizing selfishness. It just isn't.

EDIT: Actually it's kinda crazy how liberals are always painted as coastal elites detached from the real problems of the world yet somehow are also trying to take money away from everyone else via programs for the poor.

 

[Wrathe]

1) It's not a kick. I think public universities should be tuition free down the road.

2) My family paid for my college education because we were well off and "made good life decisions." Many of my peers who worked as hard if not harder than me have worse professional outlooks and severely high debt while I'm free of burden. I simply can't look at the state of things and conclude that the current system is the way to go. I'm not expecting everyone to agree with me.

3) Yes, I also want to improve K-12.

EDIT: I really thought you were going to make a point about the education provided by the military, which I think is massively important.

Ya, I didn't do college, couldn't afford it and saw no sense in paying that much when I could learn more on my own. Instead, got my foot in the door working 80 hours a week for 18k a year salary (1997, that still sucked) at an IT company and used that work experience to propel forward.

I think college is overrated and overpriced. I think that's exactly the WORST type of market to adopt and take on the expense of. How many people come out w/ degrees in fields they have no hope of ever landing a job in? I mean, if we close up, go isolationist, start making more things here at home again instead of importing from other countries, etc.; we'd need a more skilled workforce again. I would fully support absorbing THAT training, as it'd be directly beneficial, and much lower cost (I presume).