Fiscal conservatives lie to keep wealth with the wealthy.

Liberals lie for what they condescendingly think is good for society.

Social conservatives lie for what they think is right.

LET'S GET READY TO RUMBLE!!!

8/30/2006 12:44:08 AM

lock

8/30/2006 12:46:47 AM

^Are you kidding me? This is IT! This is THE THREAD!

THIS cuts straight to the point.

8/30/2006 12:58:03 AM

I don't get it. Everybody has good intentions except for fiscal conservatives?

What a naive point of view.

8/30/2006 1:52:49 AM

actually thats a quite relative and correct point of view.

8/30/2006 2:22:37 AM

No, it's a naive mischaracterization.

I believe in fiscal restraint because it is more efficient and fair to taxpayers, especially in lieu of our enormous debt and trade deficit. Applying basic accounting and finance principles to the US economy shows that we are on precipitous financial footing right now, and the best remedy is to slow the growth of government spending.

Fiscal conservatism has nothing to do with distribution of wealth, and very little to do with taxes. Fiscal conservatives are concerned with cutting spending, first and foremost.

8/30/2006 3:11:09 AM

^Cutting spending on things that might help the lower class???

[Edited on August 30, 2006 at 3:36 AM. Reason : ???]

8/30/2006 3:30:21 AM

^Yeah, I don't know how the lower class will manage to survive without money collected from taxes going toward things like a $400,000 teacup museum.

[Edited on August 30, 2006 at 7:25 AM. Reason : -]

8/30/2006 7:24:10 AM

^^Yes, cutting things that might help the lower class BECAUSE EVERY WAKING MOMENT AND EVERY FUCKING SPARE DIME THAT WE HAVE SHOULD BE SPENT ON THE GODDAMN LOWER CLASS. Why the fuck do you assume that every action or idea that others have is completely self-serving and detrimental to the non-white and non-wealthy? Are you so fucking arrogant and self-righteous that you presume to know everyone else's intentions? Are you so sagacious that you can automatically declare ideas not your own totally without merit? Or do you just believe that only you are true and virtuous and that only you can decide what's best for all?

[Edited on August 30, 2006 at 7:26 AM. Reason : ^^]

8/30/2006 7:25:41 AM

Quote :

"I don't get it. Everybody has good intentions except for fiscal conservatives? What a naive point of view."

BWAHAHAHA

I noticed Liberals weren't broken into 2 categories...is there like a "Fiscal Liberal" who says things like "I don't mind wasteful government spending...but I just can't stand the thought of two men kissing...ehttp://www..."

8/30/2006 7:32:52 AM

Quote :

"^Yeah, I don't know how the lower class will manage to survive without money collected from taxes going toward things like a $400,000 teacup museum."

8/30/2006 7:57:48 AM

well arnt fiscal liberals just libertarians......

HA....fuck that

8/30/2006 9:58:34 AM

Fiscal Liberals = Libertarian? WTF

White = Black

8/30/2006 10:42:15 AM

well if im a very socially liberal person and I believe in minimal or no government what am i?


ANACHIST!!!!!!!

8/30/2006 11:09:22 AM

Quote :

"A Tanzarian: ^^Yes, cutting things that might help the lower class BECAUSE EVERY WAKING MOMENT AND EVERY FUCKING SPARE DIME THAT WE HAVE SHOULD BE SPENT ON THE GODDAMN LOWER CLASS. Why the fuck do you assume that every action or idea that others have is completely self-serving and detrimental to the non-white and non-wealthy? Are you so fucking arrogant and self-righteous that you presume to know everyone else's intentions? Are you so sagacious that you can automatically declare ideas not your own totally without merit? Or do you just believe that only you are true and virtuous and that only you can decide what's best for all?"

I didn't say any of that. So save it, fuckface.

8/30/2006 11:11:21 AM

how come the lower class doesnt go work and make money for themselves

8/30/2006 11:14:57 AM

^^hahaha


ohhh...harsh words from the new guy

8/30/2006 11:17:10 AM

because not everyone can go to college and work in a computer lab and post on tww all day.

and who is going to work at your beloved Wal-Mart?

8/30/2006 11:17:24 AM

i had all the same opportunities as they did and I have a job in the IT industry

its like people getting federal aid for Katrina a year later...get a job you fucking lazy asses

8/30/2006 11:21:24 AM

well thats great but who is going to work at Wal-Mart if everyone has a job as good as yours.

and once you lose your house and car in a flood and you live in a town thats completely fucked, im sure finding a job and getting enough money to buy another car and house is just pie.

8/30/2006 11:25:24 AM

Dentaldamn...you know the wages at wal-mart would go up to be competitive or they would find a way to use less labor...

Please don't bring that "but no one will be a janitor"

Because for $50,000 a year, lots of college graduates will clean shit.

Go ask the communications majors.

8/30/2006 11:26:11 AM

bottom line is lots of people dont take responsibility for their own actions...they fuck up and want the govt to bail them out...but hell, why WOULD they want to go out and get a job when they can get a bank card from a FEMA worker

Quote :

"who is going to work at Wal-Mart if everyone has a job as good as yours"

how bout the people who DONT WORK at all??

8/30/2006 11:26:32 AM

how is having your city completely flooded because of faulty levees the peoples fault?

and sure people fuck up, people fuck up all the time. Why dont they have the right to get put back on their feet? It isnt cheap to start from square one, not everyone has a rich dad or have enough intelligence to get a high paying job. If things were ran your way we would have a huge homeless population (which you would no less bitch about). I guess I dont care if the government takes some of my money and gives it to people who need it more. Im not a jewbag.

and this is no way talking about people on wefare who didnt have their house flooded out so dont pull any shit.

8/30/2006 11:35:50 AM

Quote :

"not everyone has a rich dad or have enough intelligence to get a high paying job"

so you're saying they dont have the intelligence to get a high paying job

man thats pretty ignorant and insensitive on your part..."all men are created equal" imo

ALSO i agree the levee system wasnt properly maintained in the first place

how this shitty thread turned into a strictly katrina thread is beyond me...i was talking about people in general who go for handouts instead of working like i do...but your point only works with a select percentage of katrina victims...btw how many of them have been living in houston for the last ~1 year and havent even made an effort to get a job?

8/30/2006 11:40:48 AM

Quote :

"I didn't say any of that. So save it, fuckface."

ORLY?

Quote :

"Prawn Star: Fiscal conservatives are concerned with cutting spending"

Quote :

"SourPatchin: Cutting spending on things that might help the lower class???"

Synopsis: Prawn Star wants to reduce government spending because he doesn't believe that current spending levels (and associated deficits) are tenable into the future. You assume that he just wants to cut spending on things that might help the lower class.

Blow me, cunt.

8/30/2006 11:50:53 AM

ha i cant argue for all these people and tell you wtf they have been doing. I bet they are all smoking crack.

and all men are not created equal. As far as their rights as people this is true but i cant play basketball and be in the NBA, the dude who works as a bag man at harris teeter for 20 years cant be a programmer. I cant do math worth shit so im not going to be solving any algarithisms. I also cant spell for shit. If you think everyone is created equal then you are the one living in some Utopian fantasy land.

8/30/2006 11:52:09 AM

so you're basically saying that poor people arent smart enough to get jobs

thats unbelievably ignorant

8/30/2006 11:58:32 AM

Yeah, I don't know how the lower class will manage to survive without money collected from taxes going toward things like a [s]$400,000 teacup museum[s] trillion dollar war.

8/30/2006 12:13:01 PM

i managed to make do

8/30/2006 12:14:33 PM

Quote :

"I guess I dont care if the government takes some of my money and gives it to people who need it more. Im not a jewbag. "

So give your money to the poor without having to be forced by the government.
Feel free not to be a jewbag...give it all away if you want

But...as I have said before...keep your fucking hands out of my wallet.

Let me choose which poor people to help and how to help them. You do the same. We don't need it mandated.

8/30/2006 12:16:28 PM

I have to agree with TreeTwista and bgmims philosophically on this one.

However, instead of cutting programs for the unlucky or unfortunate (due to disasters out of their control), I would suggest trying to implement more measures to make sure that these same people are only using it to get out of the immediate situation that has them in a bind.

Cut them off after a short period of time and monitor their personal situation more closely to see if they are actually trying to get out.

Less people on welfare or being given handouts due to these new rules would easily allow more people to be hired to make sure the truly out of luck and temporarily destitute people get the help they need.

8/30/2006 1:39:22 PM

All men are not created equal.

Somebody should explain why this should make me feel bad.

8/30/2006 1:49:21 PM

Quote :

"A Tanzarian: Synopsis: Prawn Star wants to reduce government spending because he doesn't believe that current spending levels (and associated deficits) are tenable into the future. You assume that he just wants to cut spending on things that might help the lower class. Blow me, cunt."

No, that's not what went down there at all. Prawn Star said he wants to cut spending. I pointed out that some of that spending goes towards programs that benefit the lower class. I did not assume that "he just wants to cut spending on things that might help the lower class." I wouldn't assume that because he gave me no reason to...

If he had implied that he only wanted to cut spending on programs that benefit the poor, I would not have met it with a single sentence. I probably would have said something like, "OH, FUCK YOU. YOU MAKE ME SICK, YOU GREEDY BASTARD."

8/30/2006 2:16:10 PM

fiscal conservatives desire for all people to control their own lives. what is so wrong with that? i would argue that the liberals are the ones that lie, screaming that they help the poor while they continue to take more and more money away from us in the name of "fairness"!

8/30/2006 2:32:30 PM

first off, Randy im sure you dont make enough money for the government to use it to help anyone.

ha ok heeeeeeeeeeerrrrrrrrreeeeeeeeeee we go.

im not going to argue with the fact that people abuse welfare and are "lazy" as people here are saying. I am also not going to deny that people can give to the charities they would wish to give to. This does not take away from the fact that not everyone can optain the neccesities in order to live a normal life and to remove themselves from financial ruin. Just in the same sense as subsidized big business, we cant just give money to people and expect them to use it properly. But public housing and free health care given to people who do not have the money to optain it would losen their load without giving them money to just sit around and be "lazy". And in the grand republican dream.....THE POOR PEOPLE HAVE MORE MONEY TO GIVE TO WALMART!!!!! YAY! I dont see how this promoting laziness or causing people to not work.

also, how can anyone believe that everyone has the same ability to do every job. To think that everyone has the same intelligence is almost comical. Now this is not saying that smart people are not poor and dumb people are not rich because this is not the case. But the fact that most middle class jobs involve some kind of intelligence that some people have and that others dont. People that work full time at wal-mart do not have the drive and intelligence to be a nuclear engineer. This does not mean there isnt mobility in the system where people can gain higher incomes. But the simple fact that people have to work at gas stations and at Walmart and where ever else that sucks lends that people need help from someone.......be it the company they work at or the government. I dont trust companies to have the care or income to deal with this.

this may be all non-sense

[Edited on August 30, 2006 at 3:37 PM. Reason : RANDY STOP THINKING UR RICH.......]

[Edited on August 30, 2006 at 3:44 PM. Reason : FIXED]

8/30/2006 3:35:05 PM

Quote :

"Now this is not saying that smart people are not poor and poor people are not rich because this is not the case."

Ok, I'm not attacking the whole post, but dental...this is as bad as the pledge right here.

Poor people are not rich...its definitional
I know you meant "dumb people are not rich" but I like to pick on you anyhow.

8/30/2006 3:41:39 PM

haha fixed it, im typing and watching seinfeld at the same time.

give me a break.

oh and I dont think your crazy, we just think differently about certain issues. I would like to see what you have to think.

oh and Randy..........he is the crazy one

8/30/2006 3:45:20 PM

Yeah, randy is really no help to an actual debate.

He's the conservative equivalent of Josh####s

8/30/2006 3:57:38 PM

I like how you people think you know who i am. I could easily debate more, but whats the use of debating with a bunch of children? Every time I try to, I just get hate spewed back at me. I never had a problem getting such hate from liberals at my old school, probably b/c there werent as many.

8/30/2006 4:17:56 PM

Oh I see you're just too good to make structured arguements here.

Go fuck yourself, man. Seriously.

8/30/2006 4:42:28 PM

Randy, you have to be above the name calling. You make a decent argument and when someone is a total douche about it, the serious posters can tell.

We know the difference between answering a post and ad hominem attacks and name-calling.

Don't make your posts shitty because of name-calling.

8/30/2006 4:59:52 PM

Quote :

"No, that's not what went down there at all. [...]"

Yes, it is. You did not ask if Prawn Star realized that some government funding went to lower class programs. You did not ask if his spending cuts would include those programs. You did not ask what programs he would cut, given the choice. Your loaded question, "Cutting spending on things that might help the lower class???", implied that Prawn Star wanted only to cut funding for programs aimed at the lower class.

Maybe it's not what you intended to say, but it is what you said.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_many_questions

8/30/2006 5:16:58 PM

^No, it's not what I said at all. I didn't "presuppose" anything. It wasn't a loaded question.

I could see your point if I had said, "Only cutting spending on things that might help the lower class???"

But I didn't say that.

If you wanna talk about presuppositions and loaded questions and logical fallacies, refer here:

Quote :

"A Tanzarian: ^^Yes, cutting things that might help the lower class BECAUSE EVERY WAKING MOMENT AND EVERY FUCKING SPARE DIME THAT WE HAVE SHOULD BE SPENT ON THE GODDAMN LOWER CLASS. Why the fuck do you assume that every action or idea that others have is completely self-serving and detrimental to the non-white and non-wealthy? Are you so fucking arrogant and self-righteous that you presume to know everyone else's intentions? Are you so sagacious that you can automatically declare ideas not your own totally without merit? Or do you just believe that only you are true and virtuous and that only you can decide what's best for all?"

8/30/2006 6:21:47 PM

You make a thread titled "Fiscal conservatives lie"

Your opening post sleights the viewpoint of fiscal conservatives by implying that they are only interested in wealth, and states that fiscal conservatives will "lie to keep wealth with the wealthy." You attempt to soften the statement by saying that others also lie, but only for altruistic reasons.

The first serious response makes the point that government spending in general should be reduced.

You immediately respond, bringing up the specific topic of cutting funds to lower class programs. This is the first time that any mention of specific program cuts is made. The comment is made in a sarcastic manner.

Yet, somehow, you expect others to believe that you weren't trying to say that fiscal conservatives are self-interested and only want to cut funding to programs beneficial to the poor.

8/30/2006 6:51:33 PM

Quote :

"Yet, somehow, you expect others to believe that you weren't trying to say that fiscal conservatives are self-interested and only want to cut funding to programs beneficial to the poor."

Yes.

I understand that fiscal conservatives want to cut more than just programs that benefit the poor, and I've understood that from the start.

By the way, I'm not sure I agree with the three initial statements. It was just a thought I had, and I thought it would be good for debate. Besides defending myself against your "loaded question" accusation, I haven't posted many words in this thread...

[Edited on August 30, 2006 at 7:00 PM. Reason : sss]

8/30/2006 6:57:52 PM

Quote :

"Yes."

Good luck.

Quote :

"I understand that fiscal conservatives want to cut more than just programs that benefit the poor, and I've understood that from the start."

I'm sure that you do know and understand that. But then you say "Cutting spending on things that might help the lower class???", making those programs the only specifcs mentioned. This, coupled with your other statements (see my previous post), suggest that you espouse and are trying to spread a derogatory view of fiscal conservatives--namely that they are interested only in money, could care less about the poor, and are willing to lie to get what they want.

-----

Quote :

"^So have we moved on from the "loaded question" accusations?"

No.

8/30/2006 7:15:14 PM

Quote :

"I'm sure that you do know and understand that. But then you say "Cutting spending on things that might help the lower class???", making those programs the only specifcs mentioned. This, coupled with your other statements (see my previous post), suggest that you espouse and are trying to spread a derogatory view of fiscal conservatives--namely that they are interested only in money, could care less about the poor, and are willing to lie to get what they want."

The only reason why I mentioned those specific programs is that Prawn Star said fiscal conservatism has nothing to do with distribution of wealth. I pointed to an example where you can see how the two are actually related.

8/30/2006 7:31:57 PM

Quote :

"The only reason why I mentioned those specific programs is that Prawn Star said fiscal conservatism has nothing to do with distribution of wealth"

I wouldn't say nothing to do with each other, more likely indeterminant effect upon each other. Reducing any particular government spending will harm some and help others. For example, holding taxes fixed, reducing spending will reduce government borrowing and might reduce interest rates and it might increase investment in new firms which would create jobs and bid up wages.

This is before anyone mentions what the money was being spent on. A lot of government money goes to wealthy people. (I'm trying to recall statistics) Something like 80% of all the money given in farm subsidies by the U.S. Government went to the richest 1% of farmers. Not to mention that almost all of this spending is matched by higher prices for food, which the poor spend a lot of their income on. Therefore, by eliminating this spending we would sap the wealth of the rich and make food cheaper for the poor, both making the poor better off and reducing income inequality.

I suspect we could cut our federal government in half (cutting only select programs) before harming the poor would need to be considered.

8/30/2006 11:38:15 PM

How do you tell Democrats from Republicans ?

Fake a heart attack near the people you want to test. Those who call out to “someone” or “somebody” are Democrats. Those who take your wallet and run are Republicans.

8/31/2006 1:44:24 PM

i thought most black people where democrats..

ZING

8/31/2006 10:31:12 PM