Republican Ideology and the Poor

I'm not buying the excuses.

Most of the trades (electricians, plumbers, carpenters) are severely undrr staffed. They can't find people that can pass a drug test and show up to work on time.

The same requirements when we had an alliance of manufacturing.

It's not a jobs problem, is a people problem. You are just so focused on finding victims, you are unable to see really.

 

Duplicate deleted.

 

Missing the point entirely. The point is not about the mechanations of civic government. If Party A is required to shoulder a smaller part of the burden -- or none of the burden as in the case of tax-exempt religious organizations -- Party B subsidizes Party A's activities as Party B derives the same benefits without paying for them. The fire department still puts out the church fire even though the church is not paying a dime for the services. In fact in the case of the Catholic Church, for example, the US taxpayer even subsidized child rape to the extent that payments were made to victims and legal expenses in the millions were paid out of tax-exempt coffers.

If Disneyland said one day that all families living below the poverty line were to receive free admission to the park and tacked a $10 surcharge onto the price of every ticket sold to make up the revenue, those patrons who pay for admission are subsidizing those who don't. Yet both parties enjoy the same rides and amenities at the park. I can't make it any simpler for you.

Sorry. You are just wrong about that.

 

1. Am I missing something. Didn't the Republicans (and Dimocraps) just pass a 1.4 pork laden budget?

2. Liberals always want to spend someone else's money.

3. Why is it that people can come here from other countries and find a decent job? I had to have my car towed the other day and the tow truck driver was from Pakistan. He told me that in America anyone that wanted to work could find a god job.

 

American taxpayers did not subsidize child rape; that's just an outrageous statement, and shows why your understanding of economics is ass-backwards.

 

My food server and I are the only ones whose concern it is.

 

Your claim is that offering help to the poor attracts them. What you ignore is that many things attract them ...most notably warm weather.

You'd need to do a survey to find out how many came to what area (in this case California) and for what reason.

If you want to honestly discuss this that is

 

It doesn't help nice young people with a decent work ethic and family life can't learn enough of a given trade to enter an apprenticeship or do well learning such skills in the armed forces or going to a reputable trade school in HIGH SCHOOL when getting practical skills like working with tools, reading blueprints, basic wiring and mechanics ould be taught on a track leading to blue and white collar work. Some might even leave with credentials like being a Certified Line Cook from the American Culinary Association which lets you walk into cooking work since you hold that employers know your skill set. And could be earned with two years of study along with other courses such as accounting and small business management related to hospitality. Other countries do this like Germany and they crank out very capable workers. And we could make High School five years to allow more time to add skills and preparation for work or going on to higher education.

 

As I pointed out, leftists won't bother explaining the thought process behind their madness.

In other words, I predicted you'd say something like this.

 

Feel free to begin - you have the list, so you should have no issue.

 

Not if he selling to more than just you and you admitted the need for an inspection agency but you dodge any substanitive discussion.....uh well.

 

OP, the reps are not the party of the poor. They are the party of keep your guns, lower taxes and stop killing babies.

 

Churches are tax-exempt like other non-profits on the federal side. Churches get an exemption from local ad velorum taxes like other non-profits but only for the actual church building and land on which it sits. They pay lots of other taxes including in many places special assesments for fire and police protection.

So are you advocating eliminating all non-profits?

 

The rich created the national debt....Raygun tripled it, Shrub daddy doubled it, Bubba Clinton balanced the budget, Shrub Jr. destroy it his first six months and doubled the debt again, plus destroying the economy. Obama brought the economy back, Trump just added another $1.5 trillion giving it to corporations. Both Shrub Jr. and Trump did it with a GOP congress and senate.

Fair is making republicans pay the national debt.

 

Having fun living in illusion land...but don't try to pass it off as facts.

 

Apprenticeships with the union as designed specifically for teaching the skills you elude to.

I am not saying we don't need more vocational training, but again, that isn't why these young people can't find jobs.

 

And... done.

Nope. Your inability to see fact because you were liberal glasses is making you look foolish.

Clinton "balanced" the budget by BORROWING from Social Security. That is like me going to the bank and taking out a loan to balance my budget. That isn't even logical.

But go ahead and keep on repeating non-sense and childish nicknames. You live in your own little lala land based on fiction.

 

Why? Obama nearly doubled it while in office.

 

Then refute them and prove me wrong

Ahhh perhaps you were not aware that after the Bush tax rate cuts were fully implemented tax revenues SOARED hitting a record 15% increase in 2005, his 15% capital gains rate brought in DOUBLE the revenues of the Clinton 29% rate in their best years. That brought the last Republican deficit in the 2007 fiscal year to a paltry $161B. So what exactly are you talking about? He certainly didn't give anything to millionaires they paid HUGELY more in tax revenues and a higher share of income taxes, what's your beef?

 

Reagan requested less spending every year than Congress authorized and they failed to pass all the spending recessions he sent to them. Had his budgets and spending recessions been accepted the budgets would have fallen to under $100B his last three years heading to surplus.

You mean the Democrat tax rate hikes he went along with for promised spending cuts which the Democrats never enacted?

Newt Gingrich and John Kasich forced him to accept their capgains tax rate cut which got the economy back on track and the tax revenue increases back on track, after Clintons tax rate increases had slowed that increase and GDP growth, and then welfare reform and their spending levels. They balanced the budget in spite of him.

The first six months were in recession and while he made the mistake of not implementing the tax rate cuts fast enough that was corrected in 2003 and the economy took off and produced a record tax revenue increase and the Republicans brought the deficit down to that measly $161B heading to surplus again. Then the Democrats took back the Congress a year before the recession began January of 2007 and two years later the deficit was $1,400B and stayed over $1,000B for the next three years.

Obama's stimulus failed even by their own measure.

Trump just added another $1.5 trillion giving it to corporations. Both Shrub Jr. and Trump did it with a GOP congress and senate.

After the Democrats were the ones that increased spending 10% in 2008 and then 20% in 2009 and kept the deficit over $1,000B for the next three years only coming down due to the Republican sequester.

Here's a civics lesson for you, Presidents do not control the budget or spending, Congress does.

 

I agree. I've long thought that we could have like little villages for them. With enough space that they could wander around and hang out with others so that they could feel free, but small enough and enclosed so that they can be watched.

During Reagan's presidency, between Republican cost cutting measures on the right and those concerned with the rights of the mentally ill on the left, facilities for the mentally ill were closed. The result has been an explosion of homelessness, with many of them living like packs of feral dogs, or I suppose, feral humans.

 

Building them an island is possible but not actually a reality.

We would need to provide housing for them and basic care which means jail, prison, then a facility after its been determined they are mentally incapable.

Yes this falls mainly on Reagan but has been continued with every administration since.

The bottom line is that they aren't capable of understanding reason and should be removed from society which ultimately, hopefully benefits them as they get the care they need.

Their freedom should not be an option however.

 

The current thinking on criminal behavior is that those who are most likely to commit crimes where not properly socialized as children. The "flawed lessons" they learned came early in life.

I'm not so sure on the idea of rehabilitation. My experience has been that rehabilitated people, especially those who spent years with addictions and criminal activity tend to be too broken to be useful, or even trusted.

 

Of course the relationship is the same for every customer, not just me. I, and every other customer, can insist on whatever inspections we wish as a condition of choosing to spend out money at that particular business. I am happy with my barber and would continue to patronize her whether she had a license or not. Others might require that she had a certificate from some cosmetology school they trusted.

 

I do agree, but it could also be true that we're doing it wrong.