Someone explain, how the Republican party is still alive...

Last Updated:

  1. Frisco

    Frisco =Luceat Lux Vestra= VIP Member

    They've taken in too far in S.A., for sure, Stinky. The old apartheid days needed to be turned to democracy, not to socialism.

    Too bad, they had a chance early on with Nelson Mandela.. but something went wrong and I'm not sure what it was.

    Stinky Stinky likes this.
  2. Stinky Stinky

    Stinky Stinky Well-Known Member


    Thanks Frisco this means a lot to me ;(

    I really appreciate this.

    Thank you man. :(

    These people completely believe in a stupid superstition called the "Tikoloshe".

    It is a type of "demon" that they totally believe in... very sad actually.

    Tikoloshe - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Sadly they have not changed culturally and ethically... so we are doomed.

    Anywayz I don't want to turn this thread into another one of my disasters.

    I have made too many disiaters on these forums.

    I just used my country as an example because it is such a failure and is borderline communist / dictatorship and wanted to demonstrate the dangers of socialism thats all so thats why I brought up my contry, just to demonstrate the dangers of socialism.

    Thanx Frisco ;)
  3. nlsme

    nlsme Well-Known Member

    The thing is, here the money from socialism overwelmingly flows to the rich, not the poor. That is the point of the thread.
  4. Frisco

    Frisco =Luceat Lux Vestra= VIP Member

    It appears to be the same way with capitalism, but with a chance for the poor to become the rich.. that's a difference, but one that is being washed away by creeping Republican manipulation of what used to be a free system.
  5. ElasticNinja

    ElasticNinja Well-Known Member

    South Africa is fairly far from socialism, the post-apartheid welfare programs were targeted, and made a lot of blacks wealthy, but poverty amongst blacks has increased. /OT

    I am surprised by the strength of the GOP in the US, but perhaps its because the US has never had a major famine or major foreign invasion or whatever that sticks in memory.
  6. OutofDate1980

    OutofDate1980 Well-Known Member

    The financial backers of the Republicans want a return to the Gilded Age, a large, cheap supply of labor, thus their opposition to women's reproductive health.

    They also require no government interference in the formation of monopolies and government leaders are beholden to the extremely wealthy. Large propaganda efforts must be made to deceive the public, those not deceived need to be disenfranchised and the vote counting process needs to be controlled.

    Government has to be limited and subservient to the few wealthy plutocrats that cheated and swindled to obtain great wealth, such as Rockefeller, Carnegie, and Morgan, who are paragons of virtue compared to Koch, Adelson and VanderSloot.

    Laissez faire ideology leads to economic collapse, which can lead to a rise of a Hitler, Stalin, or Mao Tse-Tung.

    Economy in The Gilded Age

    "It is hard to ignore the contributions of these industrial giants to the development of the American economy. But some historians suggest that focusing on these sorts of individuals still fails to capture the full character of the emerging industrial economy. Like the statistical portrait, or the reduction of the economy to a list of abstract ingredients, this focus on just a handful of powerful individuals fails to capture the character of the economy for the vast majority of America's 75 million people. In particular, these approaches fail to reveal the impact of this particular form of economic growth on those at the bottom of the economic ladder. The same economy that gave Carnegie, Rockefeller, and Morgan the opportunity to amass the largest fortunes in the history of the world also required unskilled industrial laborers to work an average of 60 hours per week for 10 cents an hour. (Accounting for inflation, 10 cents in 1880 was worth about as much as $2 today.)"
  7. A.Nonymous

    A.Nonymous Well-Known Member

    Must we necro a year old topic just to beat up on the GOP? Really?
  8. jefboyardee

    jefboyardee Well-Known Member

    Someone explain, how the Republican party is still alive...

    You’ll find out November sixth.
  9. ElasticNinja

    ElasticNinja Well-Known Member

  10. OutofDate1980

    OutofDate1980 Well-Known Member

    Still not able debate the subject ? Fine. The beatings will continue till morale improves.:evil:
  11. OutofDate1980

    OutofDate1980 Well-Known Member

    bberryhill0 likes this.
  12. copestag

    copestag Well-Known Member

    you do realize that in order for anything the house voted on to take effect...... the senate (majority Dems) also has to vote on the same thing...... and then the President has to approve it

    its kind of how the government works

    the house cant just take a vote and dictate what gets spent where on their own

    as far as blaming the victims......... HEH?

    the attack was only on Dems or something?...... oh wait you forgot 4 people died...... they were the victims.... not the president
  13. Intruderboy

    Intruderboy New Member

    Ignorance feeds on ignorance. Look at their constituencies: the greed (and I will not include all the rich), the under-educated, the prejudicial (includes the close-minded), followers of most types who look for leadership rather than intellectualizing problems (there's that nasty word "intellectual" which means a person who has an ability to think), the misinformed (a huge number who are not curious to independently find the answer), single issue voters (who usually fit into other categories as well), and of course NASCAR followers (pardon to the few who actually do have the ability to think through the long term ramifications of their vote, and that also applies to most other categories).

    Knowledge of history and work experience. I have some under-educated relatives who don't know what the word means when someone calls their positions reactionary. I ask how well they know US and world history because their positions would return us to life as it was know before FDR and under the administrations of earlier not-so-bright Republicans, most notable, Hoover.

    If they agree, which few of them do, that living under conditions as they were before the middle class started its growth under FDR, that voting for Romney, and worse yet Ryan, would assure the appointment of Supreme Court justices that would assure our conversion to a Third World country in a few decades.

    I am sure I have missed a few constituency categories and would like to hear which ones I have overlooked and which you would include. I also realize we have some of the under-educated on our side as well, but those on the reactionary side are so verbose about their lack of knowledge, compassion, and understanding.

    I have written about five or ten more paragraphs but this must go into a cloud and never lets me finish. When I have time I will get back to this
  14. A.Nonymous

    A.Nonymous Well-Known Member

    The rhetoric in this post amuses me greatly. It amuses me because I've seen the exact same thing just from the opposite perspective where the exact same arguments were made just for Romney instead of Obama. The end argument was that Obama would turn us into a 3rd world country. In essence, take your entire post and substitute Obama for Romney and it's the same thing. Good to know the two parties are so different.
  15. jefboyardee

    jefboyardee Well-Known Member

    PC Mag opines:

    I also think Sprint won't try to buy T-Mobile in the next four years, unless Mitt Romney is elected. Yes, there are a lot of Wall Street analysts slavering over the potential of dropping from four to three nationwide carriers, but Obama's FCC and DOJ, in rejecting the AT&T/T-Mobile merger, made it clear they want four nationwide carriers. No need to open that can of worms. A Romney FCC and DOJ would be much friendlier to consolidation.
  16. Bob Maxey

    Bob Maxey Well-Known Member

    Blah, Blah, Blah. Why is the democratic party still alive? Thousand silly answers to very complex questions that will not be answered here.
  17. MrDangerous

    MrDangerous Well-Known Member

    Not even quite sure it will ever happen. T-Mobile just merged with Metro and Sprint is getting bought by a Japanese firm.
  18. oopsibrokeit

    oopsibrokeit Well-Known Member

    Ahhh smell the capitalism, if you're not happy with the status quo then re-elect nobody, stop creating career politicans, drop the income tax and implement a federal sales tax, no loop holes, if you buy things you pay taxes reguardless of your status in life or where your money came from.
  19. Gmash

    Gmash Well-Known Member

    That would be a huge tax increase for lower income people, who have to spend most of the money they make.
  20. copestag

    copestag Well-Known Member

    that would be true if you ignore the fact that every proposal ever written for a national sales tax included welfare for the "poor"...... they can still afford underwear and toilet paper blah blah blah........ they wont, however, be able to afford that 60" flat panel they been saving up their food stamps to buy

    but nice attempt at the scare tactics... par for the course with those that believe taxes are something that should be paid by others......... try paying some sometime and join the productive in society instead of advocating for laziness
  21. kool kat2

    kool kat2 Well-Known Member

    You mean ive been spending all my food stamps on food all this time for when i could have bought tvs! ?!? Why was i not made aware of this sooner?
    bberryhill0 likes this.
  22. ElasticNinja

    ElasticNinja Well-Known Member

    You can't just completely rely on sales tax (or VAT as we call it). The highest rate in Europe is 27% (minimum allowed is 15%), and I don't think it should be higher than that, as you then have to provide more transfers to the working and lower middle classes. Perhaps if the federal government was to set minimum income tax rates for states and obliged them to provide services (healthcare, third level education etc), the federal government could largely reduce income taxation, if they also brought in a 20-30% sales tax and removed the right for states and local government to levy such taxes.
  23. Gmash

    Gmash Well-Known Member

    Yeah, sorry to break it to you, but I actually work full time and pay my fair share of taxes. Personal attacks are unnecessary and lazy.
  24. Gmash

    Gmash Well-Known Member

    Or underwear even lol.
  25. A.Nonymous

    A.Nonymous Well-Known Member

    Depends. I've seen different proposals address this. Some propose no taxes at all on necessities like food. Others propose taxes on some foods that are deemed non-necessary. So if you buy hamburger, it's tax free, but if you buy caviar or lobster or prime rib you pay taxes. Others have simply done the math on how much it takes to live at the poverty level. They propose issuing a check to everyone every year for the amount you would pay in taxes if you live at the poverty level. This way the poor are paying no taxes at all. Anyone who lives above the poverty level pays taxes.

    Or perhaps the state could provide less services and people could fix their own mess themselves. I still remain completely unconvinced that wealth transfers are needed at all. Personally I don't want any money that I didn't earn myself, but that's just me. Maybe I'm weird that way. A handout mentality is what is wrong with some people in this country.
    bberryhill0 likes this.

Share This Page