Quote:
Originally Posted by Numinous
To be perfectly honest, both the lobbyists and Republicans are to blame for how the healthcare reform has become.
|
Interesting little tidbit for ya... the insurance companies donated 30x more to Democratic candidates than Republican candidates this past election. So that argument has no validity what-so-ever. Hence why Lewis Black said it so famously, "Our political party system is a bowl of sh!t sitting in the mirror staring at itself. One is a party of no ideas, and the other a party of bad ideas."
Quote:
|
Talking from experience, yes, pensions are abused by some people as anything is, but it's such a small minority that is way blown out of proportion by the anti-taxes douchebags it's not even funny. And, no matter the poor excuses, denying to pay taxes that help people, may they need them or not, is simply anti-democratic, bordering the fascist. The majority of people on welfare need it and shouldn't be screwed over by a thieving minority. And let's not forget people already pay taxes for firemen, police, water supply, road & sewers maintenance and many others services, and there are also moochers in those sectors, but I bet they won't stop paying those taxes unless they want their house burned into a crisp or something similar.
|
Minimizing and eliminating taxes are two different things. I want taxes minimized. And as far as your statement about people abusing the system being a minority, is laughable. The number of people on welfare doubled under Bill Clinton. This was the man who is famous for bringing jobs to the U.S. (which isn't the complete truth by the way).
Quote:
|
And like you alluded to, they might need it in the future, wouldn't they want a safety net they already contributed to in the past instead of leaving under the bridge?
|
You would think so, but there are many who are searching for other means already. I've heard of several small business owners starting their own insurance firms (which is how many were started out in the first place, friends insuring friends).
Quote:
I think anyone with a brain is for balance, but where people diverge in opinion is in how that balance should be met. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to be a right-wing moderate, both in social and financial issues, while I'm on the same moderate spot, but on the left-wing. You give the example of off-shore drilling, although I'm for the US to get some autonomy on its fuel needs, I'm much more for the US starting a serious investment on renewable sources of energy. Portugal made audacious bets on hydraulic, solar and wind energies (and our reliance on fossil fuels is pretty much for home supply of gas, cars and akin vehicles and we have 0% of nuclear energy) and for the last 5 years we're actually able to export energy. Sure, the pinwheels on top of almost every mountain range look silly, but they work and have been proven to have very minimal interference on wild life.
Edit: It seems that the number of petitioning states went beyond thirty.
|
I wouldn't even say I'm a moderate. I have conservative tendencies, but I understand the need for balance. As of two years ago, there was a big push by several Republicans to explore nuclear energy. It's the cleanest form of energy that is efficient (wind isn't) and cheapest. The big oil companies (both foreign and domestic) fought it off alongside several Democrats citing environmental concerns. All I know is that I wouldn't mind having a utility bill being under $50.00, with the a/c or heat running all month long, non-stop.
What it boils down to is that both parties are at fault. Politicians on both sides aren't "fighting" for the constituents, but for their pockets. That's why I've been under the notion that not a single incumbent should be re-elected unless he/she fulfilled all of their campaign promises. That's why I don't think people should vote for a candidate, but for a stance. In the U.S., there is always going to be "yellow dog" Democrats and "die hard" Republicans.