Is it me or is the Democratic Party falling apart?

[1ViciousGSX]

Again see my refernce to home forclosure. But to specifically adress this with the same metaphore, you aren't going to save the farm by turning off a few light switches and shopping at Aldi.

One way or another this country needs smaller government.
Fixed it for you.

[1ViciousGSX]

They need to make the tax cuts permanent.
This ^^^

[Febo]

Fixed it for you.

First, I am politely asking you not to "fix" my statements. I do not want my views confused with your views as they are just that, YOUR views.

Secondly, what do you define as being "smaller government." I hear this term a lot but I still do not understand exactly what it is people want to have happen?

I'm not saying the government is the right size or doing the right thing. I just think that instead of "smaller government" we need a more "responsible government"

And last but not least. I will ask AGAIN, how does it make sense to chop of the governments income when it is already in the tank? I will again bring back the metaphor of you on the brink of losing your house. You wouldn't ask for a reduction in pay. You would try to increase your income while decreasing your expenditures. It really makes no sense to hobble the government right now when we are still fighting two wars and probably about to go into a third one soon with crazy ass North Korea. Lets not weaken the government and make us more bankrupt. Instead lets all think about what will be best for America as a whole. What does this mean? It means that yes, we need to cut some social services. Yes, government should stop trying to reach so far. Yes, it should spend responsibly. But this also means that No, we should not cut taxes. No, they should not be permanent. I'm sorry people, but realize what we are to the government. We are its paycheck. We are its bread and butter. And if we cut taxes something or someone somewhere is going to lose, and lose hard.

Who wants the soap box next?

[311evo]

Tax cuts = more spending, more spending = more jobs, more jobs = less depandance on government, less dependance on gov = less gov spending, less gov spending = smaller government with less taxes.

Smaller government is they way to go. People can work for their money, spend their money how they please, and live a merry life. Or you can have a government that pays for everything, and also takes everything. How much more money would you spend on X products if you didn't get taxes taken out of your income? or at least reduced tax. I, along with many other people, would be spending a lot more on miscellanious things which would also keep the people making those products and doing the labor in a job.

How to fix the economy, leave the money in circulation with the general public and not in the hands of the government.

Is it fair that people with jobs has to pay for people without them? no
Is it fair for people to pay for schooling when they have no children? no

People need to learn to pay for what they want, not to rely on the gov. and other taxpayers money to support them. It's all about responsibility and our money thirtsty government is setting the worst example.

Edit: of course this is my opinion of what idealy would happen. There's always multiple sides to it.

[1ViciousGSX]

First, I am politely asking you not to "fix" my statements. I do not want my views confused with your views as they are just that, YOUR views.

Secondly, what do you define as being "smaller government." I hear this term a lot but I still do not understand exactly what it is people want to have happen?

I'm not saying the government is the right size or doing the right thing. I just think that instead of "smaller government" we need a more "responsible government"

And last but not least. I will ask AGAIN, how does it make sense to chop of the governments income when it is already in the tank? I will again bring back the metaphor of you on the brink of losing your house. You wouldn't ask for a reduction in pay. You would try to increase your income while decreasing your expenditures. It really makes no sense to hobble the government right now when we are still fighting two wars and probably about to go into a third one soon with crazy ass North Korea. Lets not weaken the government and make us more bankrupt. Instead lets all think about what will be best for America as a whole. What does this mean? It means that yes, we need to cut some social services. Yes, government should stop trying to reach so far. Yes, it should spend responsibly. But this also means that No, we should not cut taxes. No, they should not be permanent. I'm sorry people, but realize what we are to the government. We are its paycheck. We are its bread and butter. And if we cut taxes something or someone somewhere is going to lose, and lose hard.

Who wants the soap box next?
Don't worry, I don't think anybody would confuse your view with mine.

Smaller government means we don't need them controlling, manipulating, digging around in or messing with our daily lives. It also means we don't need a BIG BROTHER to take care of us from cradle to grave. We don't need the government starting up more entitlement programs that cost more money than they could ever develop or save. Remember the old saying, "Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach a man how to fish, feed him for a lifetime". Right now the government wants to supply you with your fish instead of creating a market place that spurs your ability to fish for yourself. We have a bloated government that has gotten in the business of picking winners and losers. If you are UNION, you're a winner. Not union. sorry you should have joined up.

The reason to put a lock down on government spending and income is because we can't keep going like we are without a total collapse, which may be the goal if you want to put your tin-foil hat on. I know it sounds funny to say that, but if you look at the BIG picture of everything that is going on these days, something is happening that's not so good for our country. If you look past the 14 trillion we owe and add in where we are going it get's really scary. Add the interest and we could easily be staring at a 50 trillion dollar debt we'll never pay off. And when we can't, who'll come to our defense? We can't fund our own government and military without borrowed money. So what would happen if our debtors cut off our money supply, how would we defend ourselves?

If our government was run like a business, it would have been bankrupt a long time ago. Where else can you spend lavish amounts of money unchecked, always in a deficit, never turn a profit and yet stay in business?

Funny how we keep hearing America needs to tighten it's belt, suck it up and do more with less while the people we elected to SERVE in a public office live like there's no tomorrow???

You want a strong robust and booming economy??? Reduce taxes so the poor, low/middle/upper class has expendable dollars in their pockets to do and buy the things they want. That's how you fix the economy. Not socialist programs.

[Febo]

Is it fair for people to pay for schooling when they have no children? no



You had me up until that point. We all have a vested interest in our nations education. If anything we need to pump MORE money into the education system. There is a reason America is on the shit list for world education.

[311evo]

You had me up until that point. We all have a vested interest in our nations education. If anything we need to pump MORE money into the education system. There is a reason America is on the shit list for world education.

Because techers are underpaid and the gov is cutting spending on the schools and matterials? Maybe the RESPONSIBLE PARENTS should at least help pay for their childrens schooling so that it has improved quality. Have you noticed the difference in quality from a public school to a private school? That IS the problem. There isn't even a happy medium.

[Febo]

I don't actually want to even start on this... It's just not worth it.

[1ViciousGSX]

Our education system has been getting "dumbed down" for decades. An educated population is a hard population for a government to control.

[311evo]

I don't actually want to even start on this... It's just not worth it.

My point is valid.

I should re-word it to say take less from the general public, and more from the people directly involved. I shouldn't say that anyone should support it, but litterally if the parent's did help out with the cost of education the education itself would be much improved.

How many times have you gotten something for free and showed it the same appreciation as something you paid for?