« First « Previous Comments 93 - 132 of 245 Next » Last » Search these comments
Liberals still haven't owned up to the damage their policies and advocay have already created with the massive increase in illegitimacy (and guaranteed poverty) in the past 4 decades.
And when are conservatives going to own up to the damage their economic policies over the past 4 decades have inflicted on the middle and lower classes?
And when are conservatives going to own up to the damage their economic
policies over the past 4 decades have inflicted on the middle and lower
classes?
Last I checked, Democrats have had quite a hand in the economic governance over the last 4 decades holding the White House, majorities in Congress and Governerships.
It's like when people want to blame the entire 2008 crash on Bush or the Republicans and totally ignore that Democrats had total majorities in Congress starting in 2006.
Or it's like when Democrats want to blame all of the big blue Democratic run bankrupt cities like Detroit and Stockton or the dysfunction of California on Bush or the Iraq war or something.
Liberals have mainstreamed single parenthood in our culture in the last 4 decades (via State welfare)
I'd say it's pretty lame to pin this on liberals. Yes, their side, democrats actually are the ones that advocate some types of state help for the poor, but don't kid yourself, this had to happen, and we would have paid in other ways ( crime, prison, inhumane treatment of many people) if we didn't have it.
Welfare has been anything but perfect, and has caused some problems while it solved others. On the negative side, a welfare culture has grown. On the upside, countless people have been able to rise out of poverty in part because of temporary or even medium support from welfare. And no, I'm not talking about myself.
Pinning welfare on the left is like pinning all wars and defense spending on republicans. Everyone knows and agrees these things are needed, but when it comes time to negotiate what the government spends on these and how, the politicians play their game, with the partys taking sides.
I know it fits your propaganda though to blame it all on the left.
I could just as easily argue that welfare is covertly what the right wants, because it allows their corporate overlords to keep wages lower than they otherwise could be.
He is pathetic little man. I guess I once called him an idiot or something. Since then, he followed me around for quite a while trolling me. Sometimes I would see his lame attacks from the front page - or viewed a thread with ignoring off. That alone would launch him on to one of his little rants about me. That was his favorite troll, to claim tha I was obsessed with him (this comment is sure to get the same kind of respnse).
I put him on ignore a long time ago because his posts didn't make any sense. Just so much gibberish. But he's like a bulldog in an argument - he just won't give up. So it was too frustrating to try to argue with him, because I'd spend half the time wading through these incoherent rants, trying to respond, and then getting an even angrier and even more incoherent rant in response. Anyway, ignoring him seems to have really made him incensed, because I constantly see the beginnings of rants against me on the preview page. Once I was browsing the site and hadn't logged in, and saw one of his posts in full. It was this horrible hateful vitriol spewed at me, just totally out of the blue. I hadn't even said anything to him. I think he had made up a clever name for me, like "homefool" or something. Wow. I'm thinking the guy's mother didn't love him enough.
Virtually every economic and social problem in our country today can be traced back to the breakdown of the family and staggering increase in percentage of kids being raised by single parents.
Bull-fucking-shit.
And again, complete non-sequitur. The issue of single parents raising kids has nothing to do with the issue of gay people getting married. But I suspect you knew that and you're just trolling - trying to get a rise out of someone by pretending to be an ignorant bigot.
Last I checked, Democrats have had quite a hand in the economic governance over the last 4 decades holding the White House, majorities in Congress and Governerships.
The word "Democrat" is not synonymous with the word "Liberal". That being said, if conservative economic policies are so great, why are almost all of the states with the top per capita Blue, while ALL of those at bottom Red?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_income#States_ranked_by_per_capita_income
Or maybe he's saying: My past stay is hidden? Maybe he doesn't want us to know where he's stayed.
Everyone knows and agrees these things are needed,
nope. welfare as it is done be demoncrates is not needed.
The word "Democrat" is not synonymous with the word "Liberal". That being said, if conservative economic policies are so great, why are almost all of the states with the top per capita Blue, while ALL of those at bottom Red?
Maybe cooking meth in your barn doesn't pay as well as it used to.
I'm more Liberal than most, and I'm unsure what role welfare has played in
inducing poverty over the last 4 decades....I'll give you that. But just by
looking at the Red southern states, where no Liberal dares openly exist, the
rampant rearing of white single parent children cannot be blamed on licentious
Liberals fucking their way through life.
I don't understand. Are there no Federal welfare benefits that provide these perverse incentives?
I'd say it's pretty lame to pin this on liberals.
Did you miss the 2012 election and the Democrat's "Life of Julia" cartoons that essentially showed how the government will support a girl from cradle to grave.......even if she has children out of wedlock?
The massive increase in child illegitimacy is STAGGERING. The massive increase in just a few short decades coincides almost perfectly with the major increase in welfare benefits since the Great Society programs of the 60's.
Why do you suppose illegitimacy rates have skyrocketed despite abortion, birth control and sex-ed being more available now than at any time in human history??
I think it is clear as mud that Govenrment welfare policies are changing behavior and providing bad incentives.
Anecdotal only - but one of my co-workers has a daughter who has a 5 year old daughter and refuses to marry the father because she says she will lose her State benefits.
Since it is almost impossible to be a single parent and not live a life of poverty, shouldn't the US Government have economic policies that discourages this destructive behavior?
How does our country survive when over half of all new births are to single parents?
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/18/us/for-women-under-30-most-births-occur-outside-marriage.html?pagewanted=all
This massive change to the traditional family structure is responsible for virtually all of our country's social problems in terms of crime, poverty, terrible education scores (despite record spending) and on and on and on.
Civilization is fragile as the last 40 years of data have proven out. I just think Liberals should give some pause before screwing up the family structure any more than they already have trying to substitute government welfare for a traditional 2 parent household.
The issue of single parents raising kids has nothing to do with the issue of gay
people getting married. But I suspect you knew that and you're just trolling -
trying to get a rise out of someone by pretending to be an ignorant bigot.
Sure it does.
The same liberals who are saying "what harm is it to allow gay people to get married" were saying "what harm is it to have a good single mother raise children with State support".
As I just pointed out to Marcus, the last 40 years of history has shown how fragile civilization is and it only takes a few foolish government programs or positions to fuck up civilization as we see now with so many kids being born to single parents and guaranteed poverty.
Again, why is illegitimacy skyrocketing despite abortion, birth control and sex-ed being as ubiquitous as the air we breathe now? Something is responsible for changing our culture. I think it is a no-brainer to look at the bad incentives our government offers people to continue their destructive behavior.
I also believe marriage is about procreation above all else. That is the only reason why the State was involved in the marriage business in the first place. Yes I know some couples choose or can't have children. But they are the exception since the vast majority of US marriages (80%+) end up creating new children and tax payers. All I am saying is that marriage should continue to be mainly about creating a stable civilizational structure to create the future generation to pay into our entitlement Ponzi Schemes.
Liberals think they can alter the typical family structure, supplementing it with State support and it will have no impact on our society or health of our kids.
Oh really? Well how come conservative Christians in the US have a higher divorce rate than liberals? If your argument is about healthy family structure then I fail to see how your point can possibly be made seeing as how conservatives are clearly not showing us the ideal model of what a family should be seeing as how much they divorce one another.socal2 says
Sure it does.
The same liberals who are saying "what harm is it to allow gay people to get married" were saying "what harm is it to have a good single mother raise children with State support".
I'm glad that the Internet is archived these days because one day someone is going to come back and read comments like that and either laugh or be amazed.
Guess what? Conservatives have always and will continue to lose every single issue they try and stand for. That's the way its always been and will continue. So feel free to continue on in a futile attempt to stop the unstoppable.
That being said, if conservative economic policies are so great, why are almost
all of the states with the top per capita Blue, while ALL of those at bottom
Red?
For starters - I think you are confusing private economic performance and government performance. Most of the big Blue states like California, Illinois, New York are suffering through bankruptcies and have massive unpayable pension liabilities that helped bankrupt Detroit. Most Red States aren't suffering through municipal bankrupticies like we are seeing in California and Michigan.
When you look at your list, the top states are DC or states next door that have been living high on the hog from all the taxes the rest of the country sends to the Feds. So not exactly a great example.
Secondly, most of the Red states at the bottom of the list have much higher minority populations then the lilly-white states like Conneciticut and New Hamshire. If you want to compare earning power (and education scores) segmented by race you would see a different picture.
Oh really? Well how come conservative Christians in the US have a higher divorce
rate than liberals?
"Divorce rates tend to be higher in the South because marriage rates are also higher in the South," said Diana Elliott, a family demographer at the Census Bureau. "In contrast, in the Northeast, first marriages tend to be delayed and the marriage rates are lower, meaning there are also fewer divorces."
http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/marital_status_living_arrangements/cb11-144.html
Guess what? Conservatives have always and will continue to lose every single
issue they try and stand for.
Pension reform?
Education reform?
Monetary policy?
Tax reform?
Immigration reform?
Abortion?
Domestic energy production?
Union reform?
Quick - lets get back to talking about the important stuff like gay marriage!
Oh really? Well how come conservative Christians in the US have a higher divorce
rate than liberals?
"Divorce rates tend to be higher in the South because marriage rates are also higher in the South," said Diana Elliott, a family demographer at the Census Bureau. "In contrast, in the Northeast, first marriages tend to be delayed and the marriage rates are lower, meaning there are also fewer divorces."
http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/marital_status_living_arrangements/cb11-144.html
Did I say anything about the South? Nope. I said Christian conservatives. As someone who did grow up in a conservative area, I'd say the real reason is because a lot of conservatives I knew got married like right after high school and were immature. But that doesn't change the fact that compared to liberals, conservatives get divorced at a higher frequency, and hence I've kicked the leg out of one part of your weak argument, so now for the rest.socal2 says
Quick - lets get back to talking about the important stuff like gay marriage!
I can make a cute list as well:
1: Decision to become an independent country. Conservatives of the day before the American Revolution favored staying as a colony. Aren't we all glad out liberal founding fathers were right?
2: Civil Rights
3: Environmental regulation and standards
I could go on but I'm starting to feel guilt since this is such an easy debate.
But nevertheless, get used to keep right on losin' because just like the hands on a clock, conservatives can't stop progress.
Did I say anything about the South? Nope. I said Christian conservatives.
And most Christian Conservatives live in the South.
You have no point.
The study that most Libs point to with this talking point measured: "Rates throughout this report count the marital events reported in the past 12 months per 1,000 men or women in the population 15 and older." (p.2)
They didn't compare it to married couples in the different states.
Since Liberals are less likely to marry than Conservatives, of course they will have a lower divorce rate.
I am willing to bet that the vast majority of these liberals that don't marry also are single parents living off of us tax payers. At least the divorced conservative men are probably paying some child support instead of dishing it all off on the State.
What scares me about Obamacare? The cost! My husband and I purchase a high deductible plan that costs us $772 pr month. When I go to Cover California and and put in our age and income, the monthly cost for a Silver plan is $1170 pr month. How is that affordable? By the way, we are 61 and 55, and make a combined income of $75,000. Not much for the Bay Area. It all makes me nervous.
And most Christian Conservatives live in the South.
You have no point.
Of course I have a point. Ok, so let's say that you are right and that more conservative Christians live in the South, which is not exactly accurate anyway seeing as how also huge number of them live in states like AZ, UT, NV, NM, CO, and MN. But if I am going to play along and say sure- Southern Christian conservatives get divorced more, well that goes along with the base demographic the GOP is left with: Conservative Southerners. So that being the case and if the case you're making is that of comparing the familial examples of liberals and conservatives, well then the core representative base of the GOP has a higher divorce rate than the core base of liberals. So once more, whatever attempt you were trying to make about the wholesomeness of what I interpret to be of a typical conservative family and then comparing that to an assertion that liberals have wreaked havoc with that example doesn't have a leg to stand on. You lost this debate.
What scares me about Obamacare? The cost! My husband and I purchase a high deductible plan that costs us $772 pr month. When I go to Cover California and and put in our age and income, the monthly cost for a Silver plan is $1170 pr month. How is that affordable? By the way, we are 61 and 55, and make a combined income of $75,000. Not much for the Bay Area. It all makes me nervous.
Obamacare isn't eve available yet. How can you be coming up with these numbers when it isn't even available?
http://www.healthexchange.ca.gov/Pages/Default.aspx
Healthcareexchange.ca.gov It's all there!
Shortcut to the calculator here:
http://www.coveredca.com/calculating_the_cost.html
Another issue is, are they checking your IP address, because they don't ask for a ZIP code and premiums will vary by locale; SFBA is a high cost area. They ask (rhetorically) "How Much Will You Save," but the answer for many is a negative number, as in either more spending or a penalty.
Here is the link for the consumer. Click on Read More and you will see a place to get an estimate.
http://www.coveredca.com/
One more.....cost estimate calculator:
http://www.coveredca.com/individuals_and_families.html
Well, for what its worth, I plugged in my information and my costs would be about $150 less per month then if I were to pay for a private plan. So for me its actually cheaper.
Why has this turned into a fight between Republicans and Democrats? Don't you all see that the politicians on both sides of the aisle are fine, they and their families are well covered, so are people that work for the government. I understand that something needs to be done to help people that are sick and cannot work, but these costs are killing us. If you have any assets you have to have insurance. Now we will be forced to buy at these rates even if we decided to take our chances without it. Something isn't right.
Welfare is something that the right wing overlords want, very much, because all they care about is short term increases in their wealth. Welfare is actually backdoor welfare to corporations. It allows them to pay employees less than the cost of living, insisting often on part timers (this was just as big before Obamacare as after, as Mish proved the other day).
It also allows those same poor people and others who are unemployed to consume - contributing significantly to GDP and corporate profits.
Cheaper employees
Higher profits
That's what the corporations get in return for the taxes that come in large part from individual income taxes for welfare and food stamps.
It's really welfare for the corporations.
I guess if you spend it on prisons, then it goes even more directly to certain corporations (the prison industrial complex). The food is still purchased to0.
Neither of these are particularly good channels for our tax dollars.
for me its actually cheaper.
Lucky you. IMMV. On balance, the legislation increases total medical spending (which is the point), but shifts it around so much that it's difficult for people to keep track.
edvard2 is still confused.
If more Conservatives get married than Democrats, logic would suggest that they would also have a higher divorce rate. Not a tricky concept.
Besides, since Republicans are wealthier than Democrats and Independents and have a more robust family and social support structure outside of government welfare, I really don't care about divorce rate as long as the people getting divorced aren't hurting children or being a drag on society.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/157010/republicans-greater-access-basic-necessities.aspx
You really think it is preferable to not get married and still have kids? I think it is far far better that there is a divorce so at least the State can force the father or mother to pay child support.
Why has this turned into a fight between Republicans and Democrats?
The reason it turned into a fight was because neither side cooperated with one another over it. A MUCH better law could have easily been drafted. But instead since neither side would even talk to each other, we got the law we have.
As far as costs, well my parents too pay about $700-$800 a month and that's with my mom's plan through the public school system. Of course this isn't right nor does it make sense. We pay more for insurance than any other first world country. We have some of the lowest standards of health insurance. Its totally ridiculous.
Is the Obamacare plan good? No, and not by a long shot. But the important part is that "something" was passed and with that will hopefully come changes and improvements to it so that it will become both more affordable and effective so long as the GOP doesn't try to stop it.
edvard2 is still confused.
If more Conservatives get married than Democrats, logic would suggest that they would also have a higher divorce rate. Not a tricky concept.
I'm not confused at all. You lost the argument a long time ago and are being a sore loser. Its over.
Is the Obamacare plan good? No, and not by a long shot. But the important part is that "something" was passed and with that will hopefully come changes and improvements to it so that it will become both more affordable and effective so long as the GOP doesn't try to stop it.
You lost me with the third sentence. If a house is on fire, and you pour gasoline on it, you've done something, but I don't see it as helpful. If other people try to stop you from pouring gasoline on it, you can get mad at them for not helping, but that isn't an excuse for making things worse. What was passed was legislation to increase spending, which is what the two major parties agree on, even though one of them uses words like "affordable" to fool you.
If more Conservatives get married than Democrats, logic would suggest that they would also have a higher divorce rate. Not a tricky concept.
Apparently it might be.
A divorce rate is a percentage of marriages that end in divorce. Comparing the divorce rates for groups is not affected by the size of the groups, unless one group is so small (say double digit small) that the rate isn't even predictive or meaningful.
All's I know is that there used to be PLENTY of fiscal conservative Democrats. Now there are none. Don't give me the bullshit answer on the blue-dog democrats. Those reps, the small # of them, are a rounding error.
Today, if you even question the unsustainable outrageous social/welfare spending, you are instantly labelled a racist. Listening to satellite radio in my new (to me) car, I heard some idiot comedian ranting/projecting that those who oppose obamacare, are angry racists, imitating them by yelling the 'n' word constantly. No, we aren't angry because we are racists. We're angry because, in Max Baucus' own words, is that obamacare is an idiotic, fuckin' trainwreck.
Do those that still champion Obamacare not read the economic reports from the CBO, and other reputable sources. Tons of full-time workers being forced into part-time work. Shit, just read the latest on the UPS workers. I still haven't heard a legit answer as to why if obamacare is so great, why all the waivers? Waivers for industrial groups, unions (now turning on obama), congressmen and staff. Hell, even entire fuckin' states like Maine.
Are you liberals still backing this lame horse that hasn't even gotten out of the gate? I'm no racist. I'm a realist.
Why do you suppose illegitimacy rates have skyrocketed despite abortion, birth
control and sex-ed being more available now than at any time in human history??
an inconvieniant truth
Truly we should EXCORIATE all men who father bastards. Let's start by removing George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Benjamin Franklin from all public discourse. They after all set a very bad example in this regard.
« First « Previous Comments 93 - 132 of 245 Next » Last » Search these comments
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/07/11/the-gop-is-terrified-obamacare-could-be-a-success.html
#politics