Are You In Favor Of These Issues

(1) If you were a single parent, could not take your child with you to work, and your child was too young to be left alone, what would you do?
(2) The govt. could fund high schools and/or colleges to provide childcare facilities that its own students can manage/run as a learning curriculum.
(3) The govt. could fund businesses to provide on-site childcare facilities so that workers can be close to their children.
(4) Or, the govt. can simply fund childcare by paying trusted family members & friends of the parent to babysit children at their homes.

It's very doable. It just takes a little imagination & logic which it seems govt. officials are sorely lacking in (perhaps by design).

 

1) Not much choice there but to put the kids in daycare. (Avoiding being a single parent would be paramount, but I understand that sometimes it can't be avoided, like the death of the spouse. But all too often, the father has simply abandoned the family. That father needs to be tracked down and he needs to provide for his child. But why bother, Daddy Taxpayer gots plenty of money.)
2) The burden should fall on the taxpayer? Some of those taxpayers purposely avoided having kids, but now they have to pay for someone else's kids? Some of those taxpayers took care of their own kids, and now they have to pay for someone else's kids?
3) Same as 2) above
4) The taxpayer should pay a parent's family member to care of their kid? What a racket. Make babies, family gets paid. Wonderful.

Irresponsibility reigns, and the responsible foot the bill. It amazes me how we ever got here.

 

You live in fantasy land. It's noble. But is fantasy.

 

It already is.

Health care is available to the poor and folks with no insurance, you'll just have to stand in line to get it. I know, I went 7 years with no health insurance. I went to the County Health Center for regular stuff and the County Hospital if I needed anything else. Did I have to wait in line...yep. Did it suck...yep. But, I wasn't in a position for full time employment and company sponsored health care. Am I now...yep. I work hard for a Cadillac Health Plan at the age of 61 with disabilities. If I can still work after being run over by a 28,000 lb Armored Truck on the highway at 55 mph, for those that simply can't there is SSI Disability/Medicare. For those that won't, go wait in line at the County, you'll get care.

https://findahealthcenter.hrsa.gov/

 

It already is in many states. The critical information that is mostly lost is the same laws that apply to alcohol apply to Marijuana. You can't drink/smoke and drive. You can't drink/smoke in public. You can't have an open container of alcohol/Marijuana in a car. Any law that applies to alcohol, applies to legal Marijuana.

 

The social safety net should try to accomodate multiple scenarios. The child is the innocent, vulnerable one...its reason for being a single or no-parent chid being irrelevant. Something must be done with that child. Is it not better for society if all children have equal access to quality education, healthcare, food, and security? If it's not provided, the same child is likely in the future to have children that are in the same situation, not to mention addicted to drugs, committing crimes, being sent to jail, etc. How expensive do you think that would be...especially if this cycle continues?
And I'm glad you acknowledged daddy being a taxpayer. Yes, if daddy (absent or not) is working, daddy would be helping to pay for his child's care.

The tax payer in question is benefitting from other tax payers paying for their needs (eg, Medicare, Medicaid, CHIP, and marketplace subsidies; city infrastructure, emergency services, Social Security, education loans/grants, defense spending, science and medical research, VA & federal retirees benefits, safety net programs, transportation, business loans, etc.). We all benefit from multiple govt. social programs all the time. One person may not need childcare, but he may need VA benefits. One person may not need federal retiree benefits, but he may need an education loan/grant. You get the idea.

You should also keep the following in mind:

"Immigrants collectively pay between $90 and $140 billion each year in taxes, and a recent study found that undocumented immigrants alone pay approximately $11.64 billion in taxes each year. Moreover, undocumented immigrants nationwide pay an estimated 8 percent of their income in state and local taxes (their effective state and local tax rate), which is higher than the effective tax rate of the top 1 percent of all taxpayers in the U.S.

Everyone pays sales taxes on goods they purchase and property taxes on the homes they buy or rent, and more than half of all undocumented immigrant households file income tax returns using Individual Tax Identification Numbers."
https://www.adl.org/resources/fact-...s-about-immigrants-and-immigration-en-espanol

"A 2007 Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report on the impact of undocumented immigrants on the budgets of local and state governments cited IRS figures showing that 50% to 75% of the about 11 million unauthorized U.S. immigrants file and pay income taxes each year."
https://money.cnn.com/2014/11/20/news/economy/immigration-myths/index.html

Well, you should now see that your taxes are helping others just as the taxes of others are helping you. If we are to live together within a social system, it makes sense to expand social programs that benefit all. If we don't, then what's the use of living together --- whether it be in a family, in a town, or in a nation? If you really want to be independent, and hate paying taxes that benefit others, then you should reject the benefits that come from taxes paid by others?

The problem is not that your taxes are benefitting the Many. The problem is that your taxes are mostly benefitting the Few (ie, those benefitting from excessive defense spending, healthcare & insurance fraud/waste/abuse, bank bailouts, corporate subsidies, tax cuts & loopholes for the wealthy, Social Security & Medicare cuts, zero taxes paid by huge corporations, research grants that enrich corporations, etc.).

Taxes should return to the people because that is where it came from. And the more money the people have the better everyone's standard of living becomes, the lower the poverty rate, the lower the unemployment rate, the lower the crime rate, and so on. When the govt. talks about an 'economic stimulus', they are really talking about enriching the wealthy. But the wealthy tend to hoard and invest their money, not create more jobs or improve working conditions.

But what really stimulates the economy is putting more money into the hands of the general population. More money in people's hands means more spending (people buying goods & services), more jobs, more businesses, etc. There's greater circulation of money among the Many than if the money went to the Few. The wealthy are not necessary in establishing a healthy robust & progressive nation. They are a hinderance to it. One can view the ultra-rich & giant corporations like a cancer that draws in the nation's (and the world's) vital energy & resources, creating a slow-down of circulation, and thus, stagnation...and finally, death.

 

You are being way too optimistic. When poor behavior is subsidized, we get more of that behavior, not less. The welfare state grows the need for even more welfare. This should be obvious - if welfare programs were lifting people out of "poverty," those programs would be shrinking, not growing.

You can have the last word, as we shouldn't be steering this thread off-topic. I do appreciate the effort you put into your reply above.

 

Haha! Who knew inequality was that easy to fix?

 

Please read the following articles exposing the common myths about welfare programs & recipients.

The article, 6 Welfare Myths We All Need to Stop Believing, lists the following:
Myth 1: People on welfare are unmotivated and not working.
Myth 2: Welfare recipients are mostly people of color.
Myth 3: Undocumented populations are stealing welfare benefits from citizens.
Myth 4: Countless "welfare queens" are working the system's loopholes.
Myth 5: Once a person goes on welfare, they'll freeload off it for years.
Myth 6: Welfare programs are eating up valuable tax dollars.
https://mashable.com/2015/07/27/welfare-myths-debunked/

And another article titled,
Busting the Myth of ‘Welfare Makes People Lazy’:
Cash assistance isn’t just a moral imperative that raises living standards. It’s also a critical investment in the health and future careers of low-income kids.
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2018/03/welfare-childhood/555119/

Further, the reason welfare is not shrinking the poverty rate is because poverty has been on the rise (as the middle class shrinks) due to income inequality, inflation, increasing housing costs, increased healthcare costs, loss of jobs, and wage stagnation. And you can thank the wealthy class for that, as it is the wealthy that create the conditions leading to increasing poverty. They do this very simply with money. The more money they have, the more power they have to influence politicians & lawmakers, the investment market, the real estate market, other businesses (eg, via mergers, buy-outs, price competition, monopolies, outsourcing, etc.), and so on. One can view the govt. and large corporations as one and the same. Today, corporations are the primary means by which big govt. carries out its dirty work. And is why we see corporate officers/CEO's being appointed to high level govt. jobs, and vice versa. In effect, the chickens have, for millenia, been allowing the fox to oversea the guardianship of the chickens.

Bottom line: by ensuring more money returns to those who generate the money, goods & services (ie, the working class), we ensure a more robust, healthier, and progressive population. The working class are the people who perform the critical labor, and compose the bulk of spending on the goods & services that keeps money in high circulation & businesses afloat. It makes no practical or economic sense to even have a wealthy class. The wealthy class can exist only as long as the people continue to believe money is more important than the planet, the people & all its life forms.

In reality, neither a monetary system nor a ruling/govt. body is necessary for humans to coexist in harmony and fly together to the stars. People need only to first de-program themselves of their cult-mentality before this happens. Sure, it's good to be optimistic...but it's more productive to acknowledge and embrace our individual & collective capabilities.

 

18 - Right for any of the sovereign states to leave the union.

 

It would be a start. It would make sexism unconstitutional, not just insulting.

 

No it wouldn't be a start. The start happened long ago. Maybe if you could explain what exactly you are trying to fix I might have a better grasp of your argument, but saying that you are going to fix "sexism" with a constitutional amendment sounds nuts.

 

Where did I say I was fixing sexism? Making that type of discrimination illegal doesn't fix anyone's attitude, it just means that acting on that attitude would incur consequences.

If you honestly want to know what the ERA is about:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Rights_Amendment

 

Those tax rate cuts produced record increases and revenues while the Clinton tax rate increases slowed strong revenue growth. Should the tax code be used to maximize revenues or satisfy envy?

 

You just...

Well in other words, you can't answer my question, which was what exactly you are trying to fix? You don't seem to know.

 

by Jeff Foxworthy

Which side of the fence?

If you ever wondered which side of the fence you sit on, this is a great test!

If a Republican doesn't like guns, he doesn't buy one.

If a Democrat doesn't like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.

If a Republican is a vegetarian, he doesn't eat meat.

If a Democrat is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.

If a Republican is homosexual, he quietly leads his life.

If a Democrat is homosexual, he demands legislated respect

If a Republican is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation

If a Democrat is down-and-out he wonders who is going to take care of him.

If a Republican doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels.

A Democrat demands that those they don't like be shut down.

If a Republican is a non-believer, he doesn't go to church.

A Democrat non-believer wants any mention of God and religion silenced.

If a Republican decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it.

If a Democrat decides he needs health care, he demands that the rest of us pay for his.

If a Republican is unhappy with an election, he grumbles and goes to work the next day.

If a Democrat is unhappy with an election, he burns down a Starbucks, throws rocks at cops and takes two-weeks off for therapy.

 

Is that what the Republican religion has been preaching? Ever look at data?

 

There is a reason that I have such a low opinion of conservatives. It has a lot to do with the fact that conservatives like to pretend liberals are other than they are. How lame the entirety of conservatism must be if it only succeeds by telling derogatory tales of others that don’t reflect reality.

 

That is the data which I repeatedly post around here, ever look at it?

Should the tax code be used to maximize revenues or satisfy envy?

 

I grew up around conservatives and used to wonder why I was different, now I’m just glad that I’m not a conservative. If I had succumbed, as so many do, my life wouldn’t have been as fulfilling as it has been. So yea, I am very happy that I was born with this wonderful liberal brain and gravitated to one of the most educated cities in the country.

 

1. Abortion should be as available to the poor as it is to anyone else.

2. Don't they already have that at Emergency rooms?

3.Of course. Renewables are the future my Luddite friends

4. There's no doubt that student debt is an economic time bombs. "Free college"? How about no interest loans?

5.Absolutely. There is no need for assault weapons or 30 shot magazines and universal background checks is a no brainer.

6.Stupid canard. A wall is a stupid waste of money. That's NOT advocating "open borders

7. Yes...just yes. An I haven't hit a joint in 30 years

8.Interesting concept. No. It was abused but has a purpose that should not be ignored

9.No. At least not in the form of "payouts". Loans and various opportunities for ALL races are necessary

10.Absolutely. They have amassed an enormous amount of the nations's wealth and we have a debt issue

11. Yes. DNA has shown that "we" as a nation...are killing innocent people. That is unacceptable

12. Not sure what that is

13.No. But once they have served their time? Yes

14.WTF is that?

15. Of course. You want people living in the streets? How does that help us as a society?

16.As talked about currently by Yang...it's dumb but we need to address the fact that automation and AI are requiring fewer workers.

17. It's Constitutional and right wing Republicans have skewed it for decades into the future

 

Not true. Not all Dems want to ban all guns. Many simply want to ban automatic/assault rifles and/or impose stricter controls on who can own & how to acquire guns.

Not true. Most vegans & vegetarians simply want an end to animal abuse, particularly commercially farmed animals...not to mention, they also point out the environmental impact of commercial animal farming.

This has nothing to do with being a Repub or Dem, but rather the person's ability to accept his homosexuality, his willingness to come out of the closet, whether his family/friends/work colleagues/Church members would accept his homosexuality, and also his general attitude about personal privacy. Trump champion & Breitbart tech editor, Milo Yiannopoulos, is a good example of a Repub who has no issues displaying his gayness.

Robert Reich: How Corporate Welfare Hurts You


Robert Reich: Socialism of the Rich, Capitalism for the Rest


"...executives at Boeing, Raytheon, Remington Arms, Chevron, Texaco, Bank of America, Chase, ..the military industrial complex raiding our treasury by overcharging for weapons we never wanted or needed, vote Republican while they feed at the government trough year in and year out. They suck 60% from the annual budget every year and made off with all 26 trillion dollars of our national war debt. See FDR’s new deal/fair deal..resulting in the prosperity from 1945 to 63..the years we were truly great."
https://www.quora.com/Do-most-welfare-recipients-vote-Republican

Federal Anti-Poverty Programs Primarily Help the GOP's Base
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/02/gop-base-poverty-snap-social-security/516861/

Trump Voters Would Be Hit Hardest by GOP’s Food Stamp Work Rules
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...be-hit-hardest-by-gop-s-food-stamp-work-rules

"With all of the Fake News coming out of NBC and the Networks, at what point is it appropriate to challenge their License? Bad for country!" — Donald J. Trump October 11, 2017

Nearly half of Republicans think Trump should be able to close news outlets: poll
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...-news-outlets-republicans-say-poll/925536002/

Christian Group Petitions Netflix to Cancel Amazon’s Good Omens, Netflix ‘Agrees’
https://www.vulture.com/2019/06/christians-petition-netflix-to-cancel-amazons-good-omens.html

And who is trying to impose their religious beliefs on others in the first place...particularly in places where it doesn't belong (eg, schools, sports events, government institutions, healthcare, entertainment industry, news stations, sexual & gender preferences, clothing, law, etc.)? Should we also mention America's long history of censorship & persecution by Christians from day one?

Look who’s in favor of ‘Medicare for all’: Trump voters and Sanders supporters
"The Pew Research Center found in January that 60% of Americans surveyed believe the government should be responsible for ensuring health coverage for all.
“The share saying it is the government’s responsibility has increased from 51% last year and now stands at its highest point in nearly a decade,” Pew’s Kristen Bialik commented.
A Kaiser poll at the end of 2015, as the presidential primary campaigns were in full swing, found that 58% of Americans favor some form of Medicare for all."
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/l...rump-voters-and-sanders-supporters-2017-04-07

Donald Trump Warns Supporters Could Riot if He Doesn’t Get GOP Nomination
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/20...ters-may-riot-fears-violence-escalate-n540516

 

Not that interested in you so much how about the issue we are discussing

That is the data which I repeatedly post around here, ever look at it?

Should the tax code be used to maximize revenues or satisfy envy?

 

Well since you won't respond concerning the issue we were discussing let's try this. As a liberal how do you feel that your life has been more fulfilling than mine, as a conservative, has been?