And have no meaningful solutions for those who cannot take care of themselves, and a long habit of outright denying the continued existence of societal conditions (i.e. racism, sexism, poverty) that hamper the efforts of segments of the population to take care of themselves.
It’s all fine and good to say “take care of yourselves” when everyone has equal opportunity to do so. But that’s not reality. That won’t be reality in this world, ever. So until you have some answers to “take care of yourselves and here’s how you’ll get to the place where you can” then your philosophy is empty rhetoric.
And the conservatives want to do away with estate taxes also, and make up imaginary cases of people losing family farms to support this.
But thanks for posting. You are new here, so you haven’t seen this before, but you please testify that it is not the case that you could be making $100K a year , and that it is not the case that you are a “lucky duck” because you don’t have to pay a lot in taxes. I know this sounds absurd, but it is what we hear from our conservative friends all the time.
What are you doing for health insurance, besides hoping that you don’t get sick?
Let me quibble over one aspect of this statement: does it really make sense anymore to attribute an American woman’s inability to take care of herself to the fact that she’s a woman? The whole idea that America is a sexist society is just bullshit. If a woman wants to go to get a bachelor’s degree in a scientific field, she’s now more likely to get scholarships than a man is. Women are going to college more than men, and demographic trends in education show them overtaking men in many areas. Feminist groups seem to think that America is still a place where you can’t make it if you’re not a man, but I just don’t buy it.
And I, for one, think liberals heads are full of fluff and non-sense, and they wouldn’t know their ass from a hole in the ground if it bit them on the ass after dragging them to a river to have a drink and change in mid-stream, beating them to death and then checking their teeth.
Ironically, I’ve noticed the exact same thing…well, except for the reversal of roles part. Personally, I think liberals AND conservatives are full of shit, but that’s just me.
Or it could be because Liberals keep on trying to take more of the rich people’s stuff simply because they’re rich, and instead of showing any sort of gratitude to their benefactors they paint them as the worst thing to happen to humanity since the Black Death.
HUH? Who ever said anything about using violence? I don’t follow your thinking.
Many of the programs to help poor people could get them out of poverty, rather then serving as a “government teat”
I am actually one of those people who fell through the private cracks.
I’m hard of hearing and depend on hearing aids. I can’t function without them.
Yet most private insurances do NOT cover hearing aids. However, most state Mediacids will cover them (unless you’ve got age related hearing loss) However in order to qualify for mediacd you have to be pretty poor. You can’t make too much. And hearing aids are expensive. If I COULD get off of Medicaid I WOULD. But with the fact that NO insurance will accept me, due to having a bunch of health conditions, I can’t.
Weirdo–taxation is violence. So$etimes people say I’m selfish because I want to pay less tax, but that same person wants government money to go to them. So, I want to keep what I work for, they want to use the threat of violence (ie, going to jail for not paying taxes) to take my money, and then somehow they call me seolfish. I think they are the ones being selfish.
And you want the government to take them away if they come into your house and take “your” stuff. Therefore, you are being violent by merely owning things.
Champions of the microgovernment often act as though property is some kind of fundamental concept that has a hard reality even outside the confines of a civilized society. It doesn’t. Whether or not your sofa is “yours” would be no more objectively decidable than whether or not your girlfriend is “yours” were it not for the advent of government.
Well then, objectively speaking, are your bodily organs (kidneys, eyes, heart) “yours”? Or do they actually belong to “society” of which we allow you the privilege of keeping them so you do productive work for the good of civilization?
Do the calories you burn, the energy you expend, and the electrical activity your neurons generate belong to you? Or does all that biological activity should really be thought of as a “human battery” owned by the state? Although the govt today doesn’t directly harness your metabolic functions, it shouldn’t stop us from categorizing what’s “yours” (objectively speaking.) Right?
“The arguments of the left”? Put down that pushbroom, friend!
Your views are obviously those of someone convinced that Obama is a native Kenyan Muslim foisted off as an American through the nefarious and subversive schemes of the Trilateral Commission (funded, of course, by George Soros) with the purpose of Destroying American Frredoms, imposing Communist rule, and enforcing mandatory sodomy on all Americans. (Well, a lunatic fringe on the Right thinks this, so obviously everyone on the Right must believe it, correct? :dubious: And I hope you get the point behind that over-the-top bit of sarcasm.)
You don’t have to pay the taxes. No one is forcing you to stay here. You can always leave. If you do choose to stay and enjoy the benefits of our society then why shouldn’t you be expected to pay a fair share of the cost?
He does not understand what a “fair share” means. He wants to pay for only those things that give him an obvious direct benefit. He seems to be thinking very superficially, and without a lot of knowledge about how a society is interconnected.
For example, I’m sure he does not want to pay for road improvement in Florida. The roads that are used to transport oranges to a factory where juice is made, and used to transport the juice to his home state where he happily buys it.
He does not want to pay a tiny fraction of the cost for an operation for a person between jobs with no healthcare insurance. A person who may end up starting a business and repairing RR’s Highlander. If he wasn’t dead.
He does not want to pay a penny to give a child with no mother a good breakfast, and educate that child who will go on to become a doctor who will treat his prostate cancer at the age of 75.
It’s a simplistic philosophy that cannot see complex connections over a large population or over a long time span.
Much easier just to call people “freeloading parasites” like friend Bricker does in another thread, and parrot nonsense like “taxation is violent theft”
