Am I a Republican or a Democrat? I really cannot tell ...

Politics & Elections
1

What I feel/believe:

I don’t mind paying income taxes. However, I don’t think that other people in my similar demographic/income bracket should pay less taxes than myself because they have kids and I do not. They chose to have kids and that should be a separate issue from the taxes we both pay. Taxes are taxes, if you chose to spend the net pay from your taxable income on any children you might wish to produce, then by all means go ahead. I chose to save my money. With a worldwide population approaching 9B, I should be rewarded for my prudence, not punished for it.

Refundable tax credits have got to go. No one, for any reason, whatsoever, should get more back from the public coffer than they paid into it…

While on that note, I don’t think that parents are entitled to have their neighbors help pick up the tab for the $120K it costs to educate each child they produce. You have children = you pay to educate children. I think it is the height of irresponsibility for parents to produce children in this competitive society without giving narry a thought to providing a superior education. You don’t have children = you are free to save for your retirement… which brings me to another thing…

I don’t believe anyone should ever draw more social security than they paid into it. Period. The entire model of an ever expanding “next generation” needed to fund the currently aging one is a doomed model geared toward overpopulation and instability. It has got to go. I put $500/month in my 401K and live in an efficiency and don’t participate in revolving debt. I’ve covered my bases. Why should I have to subsidize those that refuse to?

I dislike people who decry the national debt and are aghast that China owns 80% of America when the truth is that some bank owns 90% of said “decry-er’s” home. You want an ownership society, live that principle, teach that principle, then vote that principle. Our collective mind set and it’s governmental representatives are the direct result of our individual mind set and policies. Save up and pay cash for things. You pay 10-20% more financing that fancy car than if you purchased a $5K beater while living in an efficiency.

I do not believe in alimony or government sanctioned “marriage.” The state should not be forced or even allowed to regulate the minutia of human relationships. Realize that when you enter into a spiritual “marriage” contract between you and a partner, that is a completely separate thing from legal issues/property rights. You don’t want to end up poor and homeless after a marriage, do not rely on a 2nd party to subsidize your necessities. I get it, there’s a contract where you stay home and tend to the children and the other partner is supposed to bring home the bread. Guess what? That contract almost never lasts a human life span. At some point along the way, one of the parties will break it and you already know that. So, the state is supposed to intervene on your behalf for something you were warned might happen? I don’t think so. Be prepared autonomously and individually. You are born into this world a single, separate human being and you must be prepared to provide for yourself as such. I would never trade in my ability to provide for myself… not for anything and the state should not be obligated to intervene for those who willingly do so.

Hey ladies, never have children you are not prepared to care for yourself, 100% every step of the way by yourself, alone. Yes, I get it, the men have responsibility too. Are you going to wait around and hope on a wing and a prayer that scenario plays out fairly (as it should) or are you going to prepare for reality? I would never have a child that I am not financially, emotionally, and socially prepared to care for 100% for the term of my natural life. If that means I never have children, then so be it. Being a parent is the most difficult and most important job in the world, why do so many people fudge it along… pulling together “ok” parents, living on the edge of subsistence, just getting by? The truth is that children benefit from stable, happy homes with plenty of resources for a superior education, superior healthcare, etc. SURE, you can “make it work with what you got” I guess… But is that the way it’s supposed to be done? Geesh, this is not rocket science. Women have 100% control over the rate at which they produce children, and they have an obligation to take 100% responsibility for that.

As already stated, I don’t believe it’s the state’s responsibility to sort out family affairs. Our tax dollars should allow governments to take care of business like roads, security, fire and rescue, etc. We don’t have the money to pay an entire agency (office of the attorney general) to hunt down each and every absentee father or mother and make them pay. People should not have children then expect help from anyone. I get it, the other parent SHOULD help, but they aren’t always going to and you already know this. So, why did you have that kid again, because you knew someone or something would come along and help. I cannot condone that.

I think churches are businesses and should be subject to taxes.

I do not think you should have to register and pay taxes on the same car every year. It is redundant.

I don’t believe in seat belt or helmet laws. Yes, people should wear seat belts and helmets. I do not believe it is the state’s responsibility to make sure that everyone is doing what they should be doing. As a society, we cannot regulate by way of law, the minutia of human existence in the interest of safety. Are we free or are we not free? Let’s decide and stick with it …

I do not believe the government should be able to tap homes, cars, phones, computers, tablets, etc without a warrant issued in a courtroom by a judge who has seen proof of probable cause.

I think the government should regulate people less and corporations more. Corporations have the ability to wield undue influence and money in a way that can result in abuse of the public. It is the governments job to protect us from corporate abuse - corporations have more money and more resources than the individual. It’s the state’s job to make sure the individual’s interest is put first.

I think binding arbitration clauses in all consumer contracts should be null and void. No group of consumers should ever be told they cannot form a class and sue a corporation for their abusive practices. When it comes to individual rights VS corporate rights, I side with the rank and file American individual every dang time.

I believe abortion should be legal through all 9 months of pregnancy, for any reason whatsoever. If it resides inside the body of another human being, it is under that beings jurisdiction and subject to their willingness to continue hosting it. No human being is required, by law, to provide or to sustain a biological connection to continue the life of another. This principle simply does not exist. No human is legally required to “host” another human inside their body and no legal entity has any authority to force them to. The inside of a woman’s uterus is simply no one else’s business.

I believe adults should be able to “marry” however they choose - in two’s in three’s in fours. Whatever, but it’s not the states responsibility to sanction it or not sanction it as personal events, such as marriages, are none of it’s business.

2

Most of your ideas wouldn’t be embraced by either party. You’re a Big “L” Libertarian (mostly) and they have a party of their own.

3

You’re an absolutist with some rather non-mainstream positions. It seems you have taken some general principles and then applied them to extremes without much regard for how the world works. You seem to value individual responsibility way more than shared responsibility to the point of not even acknowledging that my neighbors being educated benefits me as well. And you have more than a little bit of a “I’m doing alright so screw the rest of y’all” without much regard for either the situation that got others there, the principle of “there but for the grace of God go I”, or the reality that shared prosperity is often the best thing for the society as a whole from a pure practical perspective.

In short, a Libertarian.

4

A Libertarian who dislikes children. Definitely not the platform of any existing party.

5

Yup, Big L Libertarian. Or incoherent anarchist. Not much difference.

6

And not to dive into all the details here, but do you feel this way about all insurance or just retirement and disability insurance?

7

Thanks everyone. I agree, I believe I fall “mostly” under the Libertarian umbrella. I don’t believe in the existence of true free will, but I believe in an individuals right to try and exercise it regardless.

8

That is an excellent question … I’m currently examinging whether I believe “insurance” as it is packaged and sold here in America has much value to the general public as a whole at all.

I would like to understand and address the reasons why healthcare is so expensive that the average Joe can’t afford to have a baby, get stitches, or visit a physician without coverage that is likewise unaffordable to so many.

I have insurance through my employer. I see my Dr. every 6 months as prescribed and do as she recommends. I do my part. However, my Dr. is usually 15-20 minutes behind schedule, seems to rush my visit sometimes, and what she bills my insurance is outrageous. I could not help but piece it together like this “Could one of the possible reasons that healthcare is so unaffordable be that we pay Drs. upwards of $500 for 30 minute jobs they are 15 minutes late for where the assistant does most of the work?” hmmmm… to be continued.

9

You sound like a libertarian more than a member of the 2 major parties. Libertarians tend to be somewhat split between the two parties, but lean more GOP.

10

I most certainly do not dislike children. My best friend has 6 of them and I gladly babysit for her. I like children and they generally tend to like me. I crochet little baby cocoons and blankets for cousins, etc. My post did not address children themsleves too much at all, but I certainly took to task people who choose to bring children into the world without preparing financially to provide the necessary healthcare, education, time, resources, enrichment it takes to not only survive, but succeed in the world as it exists today. This is not 1950s America where you can “get by” learning to read at a 5th grade level. To have the competative edge and “make it” in modern day America, you need things just to keep up and you need even more to get ahead and even then there are no guarantees. I’m just saying children deserve to start out on an even kilter in society and if that isn’t part of the parent’s job and responsibility, then I don’t know what is? Do you?

11

I do acknowlege that the neighborhood children being educated benefit me and society as a whole in very much the same way that we all benefit from somewhat disciplined children. However, children are a private matter, and while the state has an interest in protecting their rights at every turn, just as they do mine. I do not believe it is my responsibility to educate my neighbors kids, just as it is not my responsibility to discipline them - though I agree I benefit from both.

I agree that shared prosperity is beneficial for the whole and I started off by saying that I do not mind paying taxes… We need parks and roads and clean air and water and a plan for solid waste. However, having children who do not pay taxes to pay for their own resources is a choice and I believe the people who chose to have those children should be responsible for them in every sense of the word. They require an education, food, water, and shelter. Their parents should be 100% responsible for meeting all of those needs. The idea of public education came about because we simply cannot rely on people to provide and care for their own progeny. I think we can, at least, encourage them to control their birth rates and accept as much responsibility as possible.

Basically, I think the world should work like this: People get jobs, they live below their means so they can pay cash for things and save for what they want. If they want children, then they should calcuate the cost of education, healthcare, transportation, enrichment, etc and hold off to have those children until they can meet all of those demands. It’s an extremely practical plan.

Furthermore, the only reason cars and homes cost so much is because lenders have made it possible for people to pay that much. If we were in a cash only ownership society and a family on street X wanted to sell his house, but the average buyer only had $100K in cash to spend on a house, he would not price it above what can actually be spent. If a bank comes along and says give me your $100K and I’ll finance the other $100K for you so you can pay $200K for a house - the seller will jack up his prices to what is possible.

Consumer lending is obscenely profitable. It’s responsible for for most of the money woes in our society, yet no one wants to promote the principle of saving up first, then paying cash for things and I don’t understand that. It’s much more practical than buying a house you cannot afford at 10-20% interest which means you actually end up paying even more for a house you already could not afford… then the job loss comes, the 2nd kid you weren’t expecting, and voila we have calamity. What I advocate helps avoid calamity. I’m not saying “off with their heads” if they choose to go another way, I’m just saying that I (personally) should not have to help dig someone out when they have been given every opportunity not to burry themselves.

12

Now you’re sounding less like a libertarian(mind your own business party) and more like some old man crank like you’d hear on talk radio.

13

I just took a quiz, it said I was a Libertarian and then gave me this explanation:

Libertarians support maximum liberty in both personal and economic matters. They advocate a much smaller government; one that is limited to protecting individuals from coercion and violence. Libertarians tend to embrace individual responsibility, oppose government bureaucracy and taxes, promote private charity, tolerate diverse lifestyles, support the free market, and defend civil liberties.

This is a really good description of what I believe.

14

Okay, thanks except I’m neither old (32) or a man, or a crank. In fact, your comment made me laugh. I’m pretty happy go lucky and all smiles :slight_smile:

15

That’s cute. What’s your plan for the way the world actually works?

16

Thanks. I am currently “working” this way and I must say it was/is quite easy and very reasonable.

Besides, the current “plan” doesn’t seem to be working out very well at all in my opinion … it’s quite possible that my personal responsibility plan of thinking first, saving second, then acting third couldn’t be worse.

17

It works for you and that’s all well and good. More people should be smarter and make rational, informed choices.

Now, make it work for everyone. If you’re not willing to turn the country into a totalitarian state that directs everyone’s lives, good luck with that.

18

Let me ask more directly what I believe Merneith was getting at; what’s your plan for dealing with the children who insist on existing despite their parents’ inability to support them?

19

Also: what’s your plan for people who can’t get jobs? What’s your plan for women who don’t have access to cheap & easy birth control? What’s your plan for people who live below their means only to have their car totaled by a drunk driver, landing the whole family in the hospital for months? What’s your plan for people who work their hearts out but still need foodstamps to get by? What’s your plan for people who’s whole town gets leveled by a tornado? What’s your plan for people who study and get good computer jobs, only to see those jobs moved overseas? What’s your plan for children born with heart defects, costing hundreds of thousands of dollars to fix? What’s your plan for retirees who lose their pensions at the last minute when it’s too late to replace? What’s your plan for the person who trips on the stairs, breaks his neck, and ends up in a wheelchair? What your plan for child who gets hooked on meth? What are your plans when your baby formula maker decides to cut corners and spike the food with melamine?

What’s your plan for all the people in the world who don’t have jobs, don’t live below their means, don’t consult their financial planner before having children, and just generally aren’t all around as awesome as you are?

Tragedy comes to everyone, sooner or later. It will come to you, too, SillyBean. What’s your plan for when things go wrong for you?

20

Whether you like it or not, people are going to have children. That’s what human beings do. Sometimes the parents aren’t going to meet your standards. It’s wrong to punish the children for the “sins” of the parents.

For example, all children need to be educated. Your plan would mean that poor children would be left ignorant. What’s your plan for them? Prison? Mass executions?