Here's another question that is sure to be viewed as more apathy.

What is the downside of requiring drug screenings for those who live off the govt?
I have a problem trying to justify giving away money to people to do nothing, especially if they are using illegal drugs.
Can't afford to take care of their family, but they can sure afford that next buzz?

Used to be that the govt paid you x amt of money plus x amt of additional money for each child.
Then the recipients came up with a "brilliant" idea.
They would simply have more children and "get over" on the govt.
Of course the money is never enough to actually take care of a child, but that isn't usually a driving force in the decision making process of many of these people.
Finally the govt. wised up and decided to limit the support to "2 or more children", thus eliminating the "incentive" to bring more underprivileged and govt dependent children into the world.

I am certain that when this was changed, the proponents of the change were labled as having no empathy for their fellow man. 

NAZIS FAVORED STERILIZATION OF THE LESSER RACES

Posted by antoncresten on 9/21/2011 9:40:00 AM (view original):
PAY FOR YOUR WARS ,TAX CUTS, AND SOP TO THE PHARMACEUTICAL CORPS. BEFORE YE OPEN YER TRAPS

This isn't a partisan problem.
\
Govt should spend responsibly regardless of who is in the WH.

As far as tax cuts go.
If they could actually close the GD loophole BS and actually collect what they should be collecting from these businesses, then yes absolutely you can reduce the tax rate AND increase revenue.

It's been discussed ad-nauseum. but hiking the tax rate is counter productive to economic growth.
Hell I guess we could just hike taxes to the 75-80 % range and just let the govt divy out money to all of us.
That would certainly help us all thrive.

SURE, LIKE ALL TEABAGGERS YE WAIT UNTIL DARKY BECOMES PREZ BEFORE YER OUTRAGED

Posted by antoncresten on 9/21/2011 9:53:00 AM (view original):
NAZIS FAVORED STERILIZATION OF THE LESSER RACES

WOW!
This is why meaningful debate is so rare.

What a stalwart for all liberals. I must hang my head in shame after such a well worded rebuttal.

TAX RATES WERE UP TO 90% DURING BOOMING 50'S

39% DURING BOOMING 90'S

YOU HAVE NO FACTS TO BACK THAT UP

Posted by antoncresten on 9/21/2011 9:56:00 AM (view original):
SURE, LIKE ALL TEABAGGERS YE WAIT UNTIL DARKY BECOMES PREZ BEFORE YER OUTRAGED

"darky" WOW again!

Not winning an argument?
Can't defend your position intlligently?
Quick bring up racism and hitler...

President Obama increased the debt like no three presidents before him.
And it's bad enough to spend like a madman, as he has, but he is spending on foolish enterprises.

DUBYA TOOK SURPLUS AND RAN UP HUGE DEBTS

NO OUTRAGE

The federal debt when Bush left office: $10,626,877,048,913.08
The federal debt in 2010 $14.8 trillion

That represents roughly a 50% increase in his first 2 years.

Posted by antoncresten on 9/21/2011 9:53:00 AM (view original):
NAZIS FAVORED STERILIZATION OF THE LESSER RACES

I'M IN FAVOR OF FORCED STERILIZATION OF ANYONE WHO NEEDS GOVERNMENT ASSISTANCE TO CARE FOR THEIR CURRENT CHILDREN!!!!

GIMME THE RAZOR!!!!   I'LL DO IT!!!!!!

Posted by antoncresten on 9/21/2011 10:01:00 AM (view original):
DUBYA TOOK SURPLUS AND RAN UP HUGE DEBTS

NO OUTRAGE

I'm pretty sure Democrats were outraged at everything he did.

As for Republicans I don't find many that applaud bush for his spending, especially in the 2nd term

As for independents - well its evident bush outraged them enough to vote for 'hope and change without a plan'

NO TEABAGGER MOVEMENT
NO OUTRAGE

SURPLUSES WHEN DUBYA TOOK OFFICE, TO UNPRECEDENTED DEFICITS AT THE TIME

NO OUTRAGE AT WHITE TEXAN

AMERIKA WAS, IS AND ALWAYS WILL BE RACIST TO IT'S VERY CORE

Posted by antoncresten on 9/21/2011 9:58:00 AM (view original):
TAX RATES WERE UP TO 90% DURING BOOMING 50'S

39% DURING BOOMING 90'S

YOU HAVE NO FACTS TO BACK THAT UP

President Kennedy proposed  tax rate reductions that reduced the top tax rate from 94 percent down to 70 percent.
What happened?
Tax revenues climbed from $94 billion in 1961 to $153 billion in 1968, an increase of 62 percent.

Quoting Kennedy "Our true choice is not between tax reduction, on the one hand, and the avoidance of large Federal deficits on the other. It is increasingly clear that no matter what party is in power, so long as our national security needs keep rising, an economy hampered by restrictive tax rates will never produce enough revenues to balance our budget just as it will never produce enough jobs or enough profits… In short, it is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now."


President Reagan proposed  tax rate reductions during the 1980s.
What happened?
Total tax revenues climbed by 99.4 percent during the 1980s.