Page 6 of 6 [ 88 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6


What are your political views?
Socialism 11%  11%  [ 8 ]
Communism 4%  4%  [ 3 ]
Moderate Libertarian 14%  14%  [ 11 ]
Very Libertarian 5%  5%  [ 4 ]
Moderate-Liberal 14%  14%  [ 11 ]
Very Liberal 11%  11%  [ 8 ]
Moderate-Conservative 7%  7%  [ 5 ]
Very Conservative 7%  7%  [ 5 ]
Anarchy 5%  5%  [ 4 ]
Moderate / Independent 5%  5%  [ 4 ]
Undecided 5%  5%  [ 4 ]
Other 12%  12%  [ 9 ]
Total votes : 76

Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

28 Mar 2010, 6:14 pm

Welfare: I won’t pretend that we (the US) can get by without it. We’re too big of a country not to have some kind of government aid for those in actual need. However, that aid should be more limited in scope and duration.
Those that do receive it will have to perform some kind of public service to earn it to offset the cost or provide some kind of return on the investment. Examples would be picking up trash along the highway or in parks, painting public buildings, maintaining public land or government facilities, or or some kind of community service, etc….

Oil: We shouldn’t be getting a drop of it from any foreign country because have plenty right here that we need to be drilling for and using.

Taxes: Flat sales taxes only and no income taxes, state and federal. Even with this I believe in reduced government aid and regulation and that will save big on taxes we all have to pay out. Less taxes are good for the economy because it frees up more spending money.

Defense: A strong military is the best way to keep peace because weakness invites attack and it’s always better to deal from a position of strength. Defense doesn’t cost nearly what we spend on social programs.

Foreign relations and foreign aid: Deal from a position of strength and do so conservatively. If there’s nothing to be gained by doing anything for a country then don’t give them a dime. Don’t use taxpayer’s money to help any nation that isn’t, won’t, or hasn’t done anything for us or who will stab us in the back. Don’t lend any nation a substantial amount of money without the loan being secured by collateral. In a nutshell, no more playing Uncle Sugar to the world.

The UN: We need to be out of it yesterday! It may have had a noble beginning it but it’s turned into a bureaucratic whorehouse that we’d to well not to even have on US soil.

Church and state: Separation of church and state means that one does not control the other. It does not mean it should be illegal for one to reference the other. Posting the Ten Commandments in a government building (or whatever) does not violate the church and state thing.

Education: Public education should be geared more toward technology and then history. Social sciences are a feel good measure that doesn't do much to strengthen the nation in any way meaningful. Its only useful in a Utopian society that we don't have.

Business and industry: Should be encouraged to develop in the US where it’ll create jobs and strengthen the economy.
This is one of the areas where less government interference comes in. This pays off in more jobs, more revenue, less welfare, a better feeling of self worth as a nation. Also, having more industrial capability within the county is necessary for war fighting purposes in major wars.

Abortion: Not a real strong topic for me but I’m generally against it. If someone blows up and abortion clinic or murders a practitioner thereof I could care less.

Health care: Well, we have a crappy way of handling it now but I don’t believe it should be run by the government. The cost itself will outweigh the benefits.
Healthcare is a service and not a right and it oversteps the boundaries of government.

The war on drugs: What a joke and it’s getting to be a very old and tiresome joke at that! You can’t effectively cut off the supply of anything that has such a strong demand. The only way to take a bite out of it is to diminish the market.

Gun control: I don’t believe in it at all. It’s not about controlling the guns but about controlling people. I’m a free man so I don’t do well with being controlled.
It’s obviously never been effective, anyway.

The environment: I’m a strong believer in preserving the environment we live in because we have to live here. However the “have to live here” thing takes on two fronts because we still have to have industry. It’s a matter of co-existing without one strangling the other out of existence.



Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

28 Mar 2010, 6:52 pm

Raptor wrote:
Taxes: Flat sales taxes only and no income taxes, state and federal. Even with this I believe in reduced government aid and regulation and that will save big on taxes we all have to pay out. Less taxes are good for the economy because it frees up more spending money.

The massive sales taxes that would be necessary to make up for the lost revenue (if we scrapped the progressive income tax) would cripple commerce.

Quote:
Defense: A strong military is the best way to keep peace because weakness invites attack and it’s always better to deal from a position of strength. Defense doesn’t cost nearly what we spend on social programs.

Our military is sufficiently large that we could take on the entire rest of the world combined. We spend approximately as much on military as the rest of the world combined, and close to half the remainder is spent by our close allies, meaning that we and our allies control nearly 75% of the total world military. Military spending in fact constitutes the majority of discretionary spending in the federal budget, and consumes over 40% of tax revenues. So your attempts to downplay the massive costs involved are hugely disingenuous.

As far as the necessity of a strong military, why do we need one? Most countries in the world are safe and peaceful without having anywhere close to a fraction of our military might. If we cut the size of the military drastically, Canada isn't going to suddenly decide to invade us. We have more than enough nukes already stockpiled that everyone knows an attack against us would be suicide; I don't see why we need to maintain such high levels of conventional forces as well.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

28 Mar 2010, 11:09 pm

Orwell wrote:
We have more than enough nukes already stockpiled that everyone knows an attack against us would be suicide; I don't see why we need to maintain such high levels of conventional forces as well.


There is no pressing reason for the U.S. to maintain a military presence in Europe. It is also very expensive for the U.S. to try to occupy and control Muslim countries. When it became clear the Sadam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction to unleash upon us or Europe, or even Israel, there was no reason to continue occupying Iraq. There is even less reason for us to occupy Afghanistan.

We are having just about as much success in Afghanistan as we had in Viet Nam. I fail to see what vital interest is at stake over there.

ruveyn



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 98
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

28 Mar 2010, 11:22 pm

ruveyn wrote:
Orwell wrote:
We have more than enough nukes already stockpiled that everyone knows an attack against us would be suicide; I don't see why we need to maintain such high levels of conventional forces as well.


There is no pressing reason for the U.S. to maintain a military presence in Europe. It is also very expensive for the U.S. to try to occupy and control Muslim countries. When it became clear the Sadam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction to unleash upon us or Europe, or even Israel, there was no reason to continue occupying Iraq. There is even less reason for us to occupy Afghanistan.

We are having just about as much success in Afghanistan as we had in Viet Nam. I fail to see what vital interest is at stake over there.

ruveyn


The interests of private industry are in making profit, whether or not making profit is beneficial to the citizenry in general. That's what capitalism is all about.The private companies in Afghanistan and Iraq are making a hell of a bundle and have backing by the military through lobbyists. I have no idea if this is a major reason for these extraordinary and unnecessary government expenditures but it's a thought.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

29 Mar 2010, 2:24 am

Sand wrote:
ruveyn wrote:


The interests of private industry are in making profit, whether or not making profit is beneficial to the citizenry in general. That's what capitalism is all about.The private companies in Afghanistan and Iraq are making a hell of a bundle and have backing by the military through lobbyists. I have no idea if this is a major reason for these extraordinary and unnecessary government expenditures but it's a thought.


In principle, the armed force is beholden to the nation, not private persons or firms. The army is there to protect all of us. It is not a goon squad to be rented by some private firm to deal with its adversaries. If the armed forces are being misused and put to a private use then this indicates not only is the private firm at fault, but the government is also, for allow private use of a public entity. Right now, it is against the law for the government to rent out its soldiers and weapons to private firms or private persons.

On the other hand, when did law or illegality ever deter a corrupt government?

ruveyn



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 98
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

29 Mar 2010, 3:58 am

ruveyn wrote:
Sand wrote:
ruveyn wrote:


The interests of private industry are in making profit, whether or not making profit is beneficial to the citizenry in general. That's what capitalism is all about.The private companies in Afghanistan and Iraq are making a hell of a bundle and have backing by the military through lobbyists. I have no idea if this is a major reason for these extraordinary and unnecessary government expenditures but it's a thought.


In principle, the armed force is beholden to the nation, not private persons or firms. The army is there to protect all of us. It is not a goon squad to be rented by some private firm to deal with its adversaries. If the armed forces are being misused and put to a private use then this indicates not only is the private firm at fault, but the government is also, for allow private use of a public entity. Right now, it is against the law for the government to rent out its soldiers and weapons to private firms or private persons.

On the other hand, when did law or illegality ever deter a corrupt government?

ruveyn


The number of private mercenary forces hired by the USA in Iraq and Afghanistan currently outnumber that of the official armed forces. Auxiliary operations doing shoddy work for the USA there are also making a happy bundle and much of the money moves about in cash and there are billions unaccounted for. That's enough to pay a lot of lobbyists.



b9
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Aug 2008
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,003
Location: australia

29 Mar 2010, 6:31 am

visagrunt wrote:
b9 wrote:

if interest rates go down i am displeased because i owe nothing and i have large savings, but the bulk of society who owes money are pleased.

i eventually get used to the reduction in the monthly interest payed to me and i go back to a state of complacency.

i am annoyed that because i earn more than $75000 p.a i have to pay more than $7,000 p.a for medical expenses before i get any rebate from the government, whereas people who earn less than $75,000 get rebates on any medical expense. i cop it because i can do nothing because i am in the minority.

i am annoyed that i have to pay 40% in tax for every dollar over $75000 for roads and public transport and hospitals and education when i rarely drive and i never use public transport and i do not get sick and i have no kids. i use nothing that i pay taxes for, and most people do use the things they pay taxes for.
i cop it.

i know the response to me will be something like "if everyone was like you, life would be very hard because no one would object", but there one goes.

i do ok despite the things i am annoyed about when i think about them.
no need to reply because you are involved in much higher level discussion in this thread.
i just felt i should grace your comments with my answer.


We are similarly situated, b9, except I take a different view about fiscal and monetary policy.

I rarely drive, I take public transit, for which I pay (but which is also subsidized from the public purse). I do not, however, object to paying for infrastructure, because this is the foundation on which economic productivity is based, and without that productivity, I don't have a job.

I pay taxes for schools even though my partner and I have no children. I do not object, because the education of children (and adults) is the strongest, single driver in improving economic productivity.

I pay taxes for health care, because although I am healthy now, that will not always be the case. I would rather subsidize someone else's care today, knowing that I will be cared for in the future.

I object to my Government's cutbacks on mental health and social services, because I think there is a very real connection between those cuts and an increase in property crime. My tax rate is less than it was 8 years ago, but I think that others are paying for it (I have been the victim of only one property crime, involving stealing items from my car).

In the end, I am a moderate liberal. I believe in the role of the State, but I understand the need for there to be clear limits on the extent of the State's participation in the economy.


yes you are correct.
but whatever i contribute is not going to make any real change in the situation for me.
i could not care about the greater good.
sorry.



senquin
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

Joined: 18 Mar 2016
Gender: Male
Posts: 52

24 Mar 2016, 10:39 pm

I'm a political and religious Conservative [albeit I'm a religious Jew, not a Christian] with Libertarian leanings. I'm staunchly pro-Israel and see Iran as the Nazi Germany of our time. I believe in individual liberty, as well as a society that promotes basic moral values. That's where I stand. As such, I see Homosexuality as a sin against G-d [though I don't support having the Government criminalizing Homosexual activity that's done in the bedroom nor do I think that the Government should close down Gay bars], oppose Gay marriage, and oppose abortion, which I believe to be a form or murder [though the only time I would make an exception for abortion is if it's absolutely needed to save the mother's life as a result of the pregnancy directly threatening her]. I can go on and turn this post into a long book. But the point is that questions like these are too broad.