(November 8, 2014 at 4:24 pm)Heywood Wrote:(November 8, 2014 at 4:02 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote: Wrong. You have to increase their purchasing power.
Negative.....you would be giving them more money to buy the exact same amount of goods and services.
If you want to make peoples lives better, you have to give them more stuff. You have to produce more.
(November 8, 2014 at 4:02 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote: Of course, no one is arguing that their standard of living is not rising. This is a straw man on your part.
I am arguing the leftist narrative that the disparity between the rich and poor is widening is a lie when you look at from meaningful metrics. The fact that you agree with me is evidence that my argument is not a straw man but effective one.
(November 8, 2014 at 3:38 pm)simplemoss Wrote: The Republicans fought very hard too get rid of the law stating the president must be naturally born in the USA. Schwarzenegger was going too run for president. Republicans thought they had a another dumb half retarded celebrity president like Reagan that would sign off on any policy they wanted, kinda like bush. Once Obama got elected the kkk or "the birthers" as you and fox noise calls them started demanding a birth certificate. So why did the Republicans fight so hard to get the immigrant law changed for their white Christian candidate, but used that same law too impeach a president who was legally born here just so you can inspire fear.in others by portraying Obama as a black foreign mulim Communist spy
The requirement for the president to be a natural born citizen is in the constitution. To get rid of it would require an amendment to the constitution. There was never a serious push by the republicans or anyone else for that matter to amend the constitution on this point.
I don't know where you get your information from....but who ever is feeding it to you is feeding you lies.
(November 8, 2014 at 2:27 pm)KUSA Wrote: What is it that they need?
In this country the rich, middle class, and poor have what they need.
Now it is a question of what they want.
(November 8, 2014 at 2:40 pm)Brian37 Wrote: India and China in this context is an issue of boarders and economic model not race. You made that assumption.
We have liberal and conservative naturalized citizens from all over the world in America that vote for both parties here. YOU made it about race I am making it about economic models.
China's economic model is sweat shop controlled by one party. India has a caste system that although politically pluralistic is still class based. Both hurt workers.
I would want for any human no matter where they live to live with dignity.
I said effective racism. I don't really think the left are intentionally racist(but maybe you are) but their policies certainly are racist. I don't see any difference between using government to stop black labor from under bidding the white labor(Davis-Bacon act) and using government to stop foreign labor from under bidding american labor.
(November 8, 2014 at 3:05 pm)Ryantology (╯°◊°)╯︵ ══╬ Wrote: I never understand why people on the right project every one of their bad qualities on the left.
People on the left project their bad qualities on the right.
(November 8, 2014 at 3:05 pm)Ryantology (╯°◊°)╯︵ ══╬ Wrote: The right has always been an arm of the wealthy and comfortable, giving them the political means they need to exploit the working class, steal what they produce, and kick the poor like puppies in the street. Yet, "class warfare" only begins when someone resists.
You're just another right-wing shitpussy hypocrite living in a very flimsy glass house, in which you broke all the windows decades ago.
Obamacare's pure corporatism should be evidence that the left is just as much of an arm of the wealthy and comfortable as the right.
The bigger and more powerful the government, the more the wealthy and and comfortable have an incentive to control it. All those things you hate won't go away if the right goes away. The only way to get rid of those things you hate is to decentralize power and reduce the power of government.
Which is it, are you for the private sector or against it because "Obamacare" called the "Affordable Care Act" was modeled after Mitt Romney's health care plan.
And the GOP politicians in red states who bitch about it have given it other names to distance themselves from the fact they know it works.
Again, I myself am not against the private sector. I am for regulating it to get costs down and despite what you may argue that is what it is doing. It is getting more people off of medicaid and the higher cost of using the emergency room as primary care.
"States rights" is an old argument that has been used by wealth to create their own monopolies. It is nothing but Orwellian Doublespeak out of 1984.
The deregulation sent in motion by Reagan used that same argument and have been beating it like a dead horse. It is nothing but "If you do not give me what I want, and take what I give you, I will blackmail you by cutting jobs or ship them overseas".
