kaboobie92 Wrote:Fistor-
The flag website proved nothing. It's a rumor website, look at the subtitle. And also, if you have done enough research (as you obviously have to argue so much) why don't you express some opinions on McCain? And obviously i'm anti-obama because he is a fetus-faced windbag.

kaboobie92 Wrote:Ok i have one question. Why, if Obama is so concerned about the poor, does he live in a 1.6 Million dollar house in a suburb of Chicago? If he is that concerned, why dosent he take some initiative. Its like with celebrities. Tons of celebrities get on commercials trying to get you to help an organization, but I guarantee most havent given them a dime (even though they are much more wealthy than most of us)

kaboobie92 Wrote:Ok i have one question. Why, if Obama is so concerned about the poor, does he live in a 1.6 Million dollar house in a suburb of Chicago?

kaboobie92 Wrote:I'm curious Fistor-
What do you believe will help fix this economic mess that our country is in?

kaboobie92 Wrote:Obama is for more government programs and un-supported tax cuts.

kaboobie92 Wrote:While I agree that tax cuts are necessary, with the creation of government programs there won't be enough $$ to support the cuts.

kaboobie92 Wrote:Also, Obama talks about moving out of Iraq, and then talks about how we need more troop presence in Afghanistan. I don't see how that will solve our Iraq spending problem. Instead of spending money in Iraq, we will just be spending more money in Afghanistan.

scooterfanatic Wrote:Republican economic policy I believe is this: give tax breaks to the richest businesses and individuals because theoretically they are the ones who create wealth. Give them a tax break and their good fortune will "trickle down" to the middle class.

The only problem is now because of free trade agreements, those corporations are taking that extra money and using it to create wealth in other countries. Nike doesn't manufacture a single shoe in the United States, because the CEO feels that "Americans don't want to make shoes." I guarantee you there are thousands of unemployed people who would be happy to make shoes. In fact, New Balance does manufacture some product here.

I think the main flaw in the conservative laissez-faire economic argument is that businesses and corporations always have the principle of the free market in mind. In the extreme, it's economic anarchism. A completely free economy is unsustainable, as corporations would eventually merge into bigger and bigger entities until monopolies ruled the market. We have historical examples even, just look at the US during the turn of the 20th century where the market was flooded with robber barons. I realize not all republicans and conservatives are libertarians and recognize that some regulation in the market is needed, though.

Reganomics doesn't work today because of NAFTA, plain and simple. I think there should be a law that states a corporation should get not one red cent in tax breaks unless a certain percentage of their manufacturing is done right here. Companies like Nike suck wealth from the American market and put nothing back. After all, if every business moved overseas, who would be left to buy those sneakers and t-shirts and cars?

kaboobie92 Wrote:Well lets see, a 19 year old who although his parents could easily pay for everything, decides to pay for it himself. I pay for most of my college, my car, my gas, my insurance, everything. And do you know why I do it? It's because i dont like people wiping my ass.

kaboobie92 Wrote:It's because i'm a sophomore in college... and my parents paid for my truck, and one of my grandparents gave me the benz..

kaboobie92 Wrote:sweet. Yeah funny because my daily driver is a chevy silverado (13 mpg) and my wknd car is the benz that still only gets 19 city. Im just glad my parents pay for my gas lol

kaboobie92 Wrote:how does that make a difference? Just because you've had more time to eff things up? Just because my parents have money dosent mean that I am blind to politics. And I'm paying for college so I cant afford it and my parents want to help. I dont see how thats a big deal? I think someone is just jealous. So get over it. And the reason I said above that I pay for my car and gas and then said I didnt, was because I payed half for my truck and split the gas. So I can't claim that I "pay" for them.

kaboobie92 Wrote:yes that line was lashing out blindly. And I will fully admit that I have a lot more to learn, but this dosen't mean i *don't have a descent grasp on politics. I am pretty intelligent and can think for myself. But everyone has more to learn.

kaboobie92 Wrote:how does that make a difference? Just because you've had more time to eff things up? Just because my parents have money dosent mean that I am blind to politics. And I'm paying for college so I cant afford it and my parents want to help. I dont see how thats a big deal? I think someone is just jealous. So get over it. And the reason I said above that I pay for my car and gas and then said I didnt, was because I payed half for my truck and split the gas. So I can't claim that I "pay" for them.

scooterfanatic Wrote:McCain is a bumbling old fool, but Obama is no better. I'm voting for Nader in '08

providencecrow Wrote:

kaboobie92 Wrote:Really? If the democrats had their way the government would be a lot bigger than it is now. McCain wants to keep it small as it should be. The government is getting too much power and is wasting too much money. Granted they arent going to shrink the gov't right away, but it would be a step in the right direction.

Name the last republican president we had that shrunk the government?

Every Republican President. That's why you'll keep waiting. It will be a while before we write down every Republican president that has ever been in office.

Don't worry, i'll wait.

providencecrow Wrote:[quote author=kaboobie92 board=politics thread=678 post=20895 time=1216917218]

Really? If the democrats had their way the government would be a lot bigger than it is now. McCain wants to keep it small as it should be. The government is getting too much power and is wasting too much money. Granted they arent going to shrink the gov't right away, but it would be a step in the right direction.

kaboobie92 Wrote:

Fistor Wrote:Here's the quote, in case you want to refute it:



Please attempt to defend this irresponsible statement.

even though I disagree with most things people say in this thread, i agree that this is ridiculous. How could u say something so degrading to the troops that are protecting your freedom? And even though i'm only 18 and have limited experience (as fistor has pointed out lol) how are you "tired" of dealing with pro Bush people? And it's people with an attitude like that, that are causing a split in politics. "Die with the rest of those buttholes". Hmmm, you obviously really appreciate the different views possessed in this country that makes it what it is. America would not be "America" if people didnt have different opinions and beliefs. It is what makes a democracy work.

internkylebusch Wrote:

providencecrow Wrote:[quote author=kaboobie92 board=politics thread=678 post=20895 time=1216917218]

Really? If the democrats had their way the government would be a lot bigger than it is now. McCain wants to keep it small as it should be. The government is getting too much power and is wasting too much money. Granted they arent going to shrink the gov't right away, but it would be a step in the right direction.

Name the last republican president we had that shrunk the government?

Every Republican President. That's why you'll keep waiting. It will be a while before we write down every Republican president that has ever been in office.

Mad Dog Wrote:

scooterfanatic Wrote:Republican economic policy I believe is this: give tax breaks to the richest businesses and individuals because theoretically they are the ones who create wealth. Give them a tax break and their good fortune will "trickle down" to the middle class.

The only problem is now because of free trade agreements, those corporations are taking that extra money and using it to create wealth in other countries. Nike doesn't manufacture a single shoe in the United States, because the CEO feels that "Americans don't want to make shoes." I guarantee you there are thousands of unemployed people who would be happy to make shoes. In fact, New Balance does manufacture some product here.

I think the main flaw in the conservative laissez-faire economic argument is that businesses and corporations always have the principle of the free market in mind. In the extreme, it's economic anarchism. A completely free economy is unsustainable, as corporations would eventually merge into bigger and bigger entities until monopolies ruled the market. We have historical examples even, just look at the US during the turn of the 20th century where the market was flooded with robber barons. I realize not all republicans and conservatives are libertarians and recognize that some regulation in the market is needed, though.

Reganomics doesn't work today because of NAFTA, plain and simple. I think there should be a law that states a corporation should get not one red cent in tax breaks unless a certain percentage of their manufacturing is done right here. Companies like Nike suck wealth from the American market and put nothing back. After all, if every business moved overseas, who would be left to buy those sneakers and t-shirts and cars?

Wow scooter that makes alot of sense and I agree with you about tax breaks too American companys that manufacture nothing in America. But mabey I think it 's a little more accurate to say that Reganomics works less. Most American companies are not like Nike but enough are to make a huge dent. However if the standard of living across the globe were to rise because of free trade agreements, then Reganomics would reign as king again as long as the playing feild is kept as fair as possible.

hotsauce Wrote:

Mad Dog Wrote:Wow scooter that makes alot of sense and I agree with you about tax breaks too American companys that manufacture nothing in America. But mabey I think it 's a little more accurate to say that Reganomics works less. Most American companies are not like Nike but enough are to make a huge dent. However if the standard of living across the globe were to rise because of free trade agreements, then Reganomics would reign as king again as long as the playing feild is kept as fair as possible.

The best thing to do, I believe, is to tax companies who ship their jobs out of the country. Give tax breaks to companies who keep their jobs in this country. I think if you handle things that way, we will have more companies staying here and maybe bringing jobs back here. Give the companies incentives to stay and employ here.

Fistor Wrote:Kindly refrain from piling on. He admitted he has more to learn. I think that took some balls.