Which is the REAL Tea Party

[trigg3r]

Your statement presumes that there is work to be had.

Most protesters, I believe, would be much quieter if they had jobs (or prospects of a job)--and if the government hadn't given billions to Wall Street (and many other industries (insurance, oil, etc.)) to protect those existing jobs--sometimes including lavish salaries that came with them.

Well, $20 perhaps approximates a minimum standard of living better than the current minimum wage, but raising the minimum wage is not necessary.

More important is creating good jobs--something that the Republicans especially have been resistant to do. A jobs program for infrastructure worked in the past, but the Repubs are resistant to even end the Bush tax cuts, not to mention return tax rates to levels that were existent before the Reagan era, when the economy hummed along very well, thank you.

I support reasonable stipulations for receiving federal assistance.

The wealthy, for starters, and the self perpetuating boost in productivity from better-educated citizens who also save money by knowing how to live better healthwise, etc. (Probably would include a nationalized health care system also (and conditions on being eligible for that system), which would cost less than the U.S.'s current system. Also is best implemented by the education matching the labor demands of society. And it would likely include a sound convention--if not policy--regarding birth control and family planning, which the conservatives have especially kiboshed for decades, even though it would provide huge savings societally and governmentally.)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9220227

Sadly, it means that there would be fewer super-rich and that the superrich and rich alike might not be so rich. But there would be plenty of opportunity for the rich to still live a superior lifestyle; the key difference is that fewer of the poor would be living such a desperate one.

The wealthy pay for it all? Nice idea, but not happening. I have no issue with raising taxes on the 1%. I do however take issue when someone blames this on one party. It is both parties running this country into the ground. Not just one. The Dems had total control from January 2009 to January 2011 and were unable to do anything positive in regards to jobs and or the economy. How is that stimulus working?

Back to the 1%. You can have them pay more in taxes, but that still won't solve the issues we have. Before increasing their taxes we probably should make major changes in spending. Otherwise, we are just fixing a leak in a boat with chewing gum. As for free college educations for everyone..... That idea alone is absurd. You can only tax the wealthy so much and even at that point we won't be able to give people free college educations.

 

[LogGrad98]

Basically what needs to happen is that as soon as your verifiable income goes over $1 million per year, you automatically pay 50% of it in taxes. Then, when you work really hard and get it back to $1 million AFTER the 50% tax (so you are making $2 million per year essentially), then the tax goes up to 75%. And so on. This way, no one ever makes more than $1 million per year in after-tax income, and the top 1% are taxed at rates between 50% and 100%. That would fix all of our problems automatically. This way we can redistribute all that money to the bottom 25%, essentially eliminating that bracket entirely.

Of course, as soon as all the rich people move out of the country, I am not real sure how it would proceed from there. But in the meantime we would all be living high on the hog!

 

[Revolution 9]

I think he's talking about people sitting at home on their couch waiting for their welfare check to come because they are to lazy to go get a job and actually try to support themselves. I have nothing but mad props for those who try to succeed, and nothing but disdain for those who sit and wait for someone else to take care of them.

All of a sudden anyone receiving anything is lazy. There are a lot people that can't see the difference between true need, and waste.

 

[Surely]

All of a sudden anyone receiving anything is lazy. There are a lot people that can't see the difference between true need, and waste.

I think that there really are people out there who need help to survive. But there are also those who have learned to take advantage of the system. They are perfectly able (or capable) of getting a job, yet they refuse to do so because it is easier to sit and let someone else take care of you. Here is my final thought on this:

"It's easy to sit there and say you'd like to have more money. And I guess that's what I like about it. It's easy. Just sitting there, rocking back and forth, wanting that money.
Jack Handey"

 

[Mission Accomplished]

Tea Party can't be taken as a real movement for change they are running right to the lobbyist groups in flocks
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/the-center-for-public-integrity/15-tea-party-caucus-fresh_b_1101194.html

 

[Gameface]

All of a sudden anyone receiving anything is lazy. There are a lot people that can't see the difference between true need, and waste.

True need is not at all what we're talking about here.

True need is enough calories to not starve to death, clothing to keep from freezing to death and shelter. That's what a human being "needs." So if we make sure everyone has that is it okay if people who have more than that carry on with their lives?

 

[Mission Accomplished]

True need is not at all what we're talking about here.

True need is enough calories to not starve to death, clothing to keep from freezing to death and shelter. That's what a human being "needs." So if we make sure everyone has that is it okay if people who have more than that carry on with their lives?

But, if we are a country rich in resources and we only give everyone the bare necessities and thus they invented projects. Better help that someone gets luck and becomes an athlete. Because it is almost impossible to break the cycle of poverty.

or you would call those who are working multiple jobs from 14 years lazy because they get laid off and don't have an education to fall back on.

 

[Duck Rodgers]

They both don't hold a ****ing candle to the Boston Tea Party or the subsequent revolutionary war crowd.

 

[Gameface]

But, if we are a country rich in resources and we only give everyone the bare necessities and thus they invented projects. Better help that someone gets luck and becomes an athlete. Because it is almost impossible to break the cycle of poverty.

or you would call those who are working multiple jobs from 14 years lazy because they get laid off and don't have an education to fall back on.

I didn't call anyone lazy. I think it is possible for someone to be both intelligent and hard working and still be poor. I don't look down on poor people. There are much more important things in life than money and happiness can be found in a variety of ways and places.

This is about some subjective concept of fairness that if someone has a lot they should be forced to give some of it away. I come from a different perspective that personal property rights are more important than an ever changing subjective standard of what's too much and what's too little. According to my way of looking at this issue force need never be used against anyone. I think not using force against/for people is a greater ideal than making sure everyone is materialistically equal.

 

[LogGrad98]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Gameface again.

 

[LogGrad98]

The real tea party.