Why are there republicans and democrats if they are both terruble?

[Mehmani]

[quote name='ADHD-Guitar' timestamp='1303414347' post='5157196']
That's not conservatism. It's capitalism. Also, they're not trying to punish the poor, they simply do not reward those who choose not to work. Liberals at least try to rectify this, but they fail to avoid loop holes and potential methods for exploitation.

For instance, trying to tax the rich more doesn't help at all. The only people who could actually make a difference simply outset their resources and end up paying only 5-10% of their 25 million dollar salary.

How about instead of giving poor people money, give them a job instead? O_o A real job, that pays wages they can actually live off of.

I'm all for taxing the hell out of those who are truly rich, but we can't just tax people who have a static salary that happens to be fairly high and expect s*** to get done.
[/quote]

But think of the equality doctrine - we can't pick and choose which rich people to and not to tax. Not only would it be unfair, it would also be time-consuming. And creating jobs needs money, and if you decide not to tax those with money then where will it come from? And also, under UK law everyone with a salary of over £200,000 annually has to pay a 50% income tax. I know you probably don't like to hear it, but taxing the rich DOES help. Even 10% off of a billionaire's annual salary would be a huge amount of money. Do you honestly think that that would not help? That taxing those with a lot of money to spare is wrong and doesn't work? That they have all that money, so why don't we ignore them and tax the poor. Punish them for being too poor to afford a good education. Punish them for being too poor and too unqualified to survive in a brutal jobs market where jobs aren't being created because the rich governments are lowering taxes and not having enough money to create new jobs. Anyone who has a salary over a certain point (i.e. they clearly have money to spare) should be heavily taxed.

Look at my country, England. We recently elected a Conservative, very right-wing government. They cut business tax and lowered taxes on the rich. They then raised University education fees by 300% (remember, about 10 years Universities were FREE in the UK, and even after that they were reasonably cheap). They cut public education, public heath and benefits for the poor. SureStart, a fantastic and free program for young children which is not only cheap but also proven to work (a SureStart child is 60% more likely to go to University than a normal child) was cut. Our Prime Minister made a speech saying that immigrants should learn English. Government-funded immigrant English courses were cut so immigrants couldn't learn English, and therefore were not able to get jobs. Look at what this government is doing - the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. A government run by the [i]Conservative[/i] Party. They make it harder for the poor to get a good education and easier for the rich.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

Five percent of Americans have ninety-five percent of the wealth. I'm all for rewarding the hardworking, but we can agree that that's prima facie outrageous. Now, the elimination of the bourgeois isn't going to happen, but everyone bleeds red and there's a point where encouraging a well-endowed person for whatever they're doing loses its meaning.

As if members of the five percent crowd were even doing anything of valour. If they were truly as trustworthy in improving as much as their wealth would indicate, why are they so petrified at the prospect of spreading their wealth around a tad? Perhaps it's because their idea of what is just includes their having nineteen times the wealth of "other people". Because this is not just, we must question the credibility of these people in their capabilities to making improvements to the extent that they're rewarded.

What should be done is to gradually but notably reduce the amount of money one can potentially get while increasing the general amount of money one can expect to get.

[quote name ="Tal"]
Look at my country, England. We recently elected a Conservative, very right-wing government. They cut business tax and lowered taxes on the rich. They then raised University education fees by 300% (remember, about 10 years Universities were FREE in the UK, and even after that they were reasonably cheap). They cut public education, public heath and benefits for the poor. SureStart, a fantastic and free program for young children which is not only cheap but also proven to work (a SureStart child is 60% more likely to go to University than a normal child) was cut. Our Prime Minister made a speech saying that immigrants should learn English. Government-funded immigrant English courses were cut so immigrants couldn't learn English, and therefore were not able to get jobs. Look at what this government is doing - the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. A government run by the [i]Conservative[/i] Party. They make it harder for the poor to get a good education and easier for the rich.
[/quote]

Watch them get voted in again when the next election rounds the bend. And yet, nobody could possibly provide a sound argument in favour of Cameron. It's in such plain site that he's so horrible, but the rich who benefit from his action know the significance of said actions so much more, and will vote for him to get more rich. As many Conservative voters as there are, none of them vote proudly. They're either suitably guilty or insane. Despite this, they still win because the majority of people don't understand the extent to which the Tories are f***ing up their country.

[quote]
Why are there republicans and democrats if they are both terruble? [/quote]

Because if there were only one party America wouldn't have its facade of Democracy to hide its actually being a Corporatocracy from the public.

[quote name='Hinagiku Katsura' timestamp='1303130138' post='5148216']Actually, most of the time, I take being called an American as an insult. But you've no way of knowing, so I don't mind.[/quote]

Where I'm from, you'd be called a "frantic racist".

[quote name='Hinagiku Katsura' timestamp='1303130138' post='5148216']
I'd rather know your age, though. I can't see many people speaking of such a topic at fifteen. Unless you're an adult, too. I'm not adept with this sort of conversation, to be honest.[/quote]

He's actually fourteen, he just demonstrates valours that you don't. You recognize your failure to be "adept with this sort of conversation", and yet you go on a tirade about how horrible taxes are anyway instead of educating yourself. Where I'm from, this is referred to as "stupidity". Where you stand on how people should be treated is the most critical thing you can possibly invest in and not giving the issue the light of day's unacceptable.

[quote name='Hinagiku Katsura' timestamp='1303130138' post='5148216']
And the government here does put it's fingers around, as well. I, myself, will assume that our own health care is our most popular gain that our taxes do. The pay isn't very equal in accordance to job, though the better payed have larger taxes off their salary while the lesser payed get less taxes. People here can even abuse the welfare system. They can say they're searching for a new job, yet not have their welfare cut off if nobody finds out they're lying. Albeit, it really is a low and bare amount of money you make from Welfare, buy it still awards laziness to some of the wrong people.[/quote]

Think of "profiting off the labour of employees" as "abusing the welfare system" except way worse in that people who do the latter need the money to live and people who do the former don't and make much more.

[quote name='Hinagiku Katsura' timestamp='1303130138' post='5148216']
In addition, taxes are payed to keep prisoners in jail by sending prisons money and such. But what if I don't want to pay for some murderers, rapists or arsonists, per se, to even have the chance to lie down in a bed tonight, rather than possibly get what they deserve? Or, maybe I think the other way, and that what they deserve is to stay in there for a royal fraction of their lives to think of what they've done. Perhaps I would have liked that extra money to feed some of the prisoners their just desserts.[/quote]

Where I'm from and where you're from too, most people consider torture and/or the death penalty wrong, and so it doesn't leak into the policies of parties seeking the votes of our locations' people. Ideally, a democratic government reflects the opinions of its country's people, and taxes are spent to convert those opinions into what said people consider improvements. That's what taxes are.

I happen to be against today's prisons too, for very different reasons than you. Namely, being raped repeatedly by a prison guard doesn't do much to discourage prisoners from committing crimes.

If there's anything that you can take away from this post, it's is why people commit crime. People commit crime because they haven't learned that it's wrong. Education is critical in preventing crime. Learning is a process by which the educated has beliefs of what is right and wrong imposed upon them with variable impact. The self-taught force beliefs upon themselves. That's what education is. If our society could consistently impress what we define as criminal acts as being wrong upon everyone, much damage could be prevented.

[Nathanael D. Striker]

I'm a moderate. I believe that the rich need to be taxed more. The reason being is that we cannot just cut spending, like the republicans are proposing. We need to increase the revenue that the US creates in order to eliminate the national debt. I also believe that abortion is wrong because it is "murder" in a sense. That is the democrat side of the coin. For the republican side, I think that being gay is wrong, due to my beliefs. I also believe that we need a strong military in order to defend ourselves domestically and in other countries. Oh, feel free to tear this post apart, I don't mind at all.

[Tentacruel]

[quote name='Mikhail Nekem'evič Tal' timestamp='1303509763' post='5160266']
But think of the equality doctrine - we can't pick and choose which rich people to and not to tax. Not only would it be unfair, it would also be time-consuming. And creating jobs needs money, and if you decide not to tax those with money then where will it come from? And also, under UK law everyone with a salary of over £200,000 annually has to pay a 50% income tax. I know you probably don't like to hear it, but taxing the rich DOES help. Even 10% off of a billionaire's annual salary would be a huge amount of money. Do you honestly think that that would not help? That taxing those with a lot of money to spare is wrong and doesn't work? That they have all that money, so why don't we ignore them and tax the poor. Punish them for being too poor to afford a good education. Punish them for being too poor and too unqualified to survive in a brutal jobs market where jobs aren't being created because the rich governments are lowering taxes and not having enough money to create new jobs. Anyone who has a salary over a certain point (i.e. they clearly have money to spare) should be heavily taxed.

Look at my country, England. We recently elected a Conservative, very right-wing government. They cut business tax and lowered taxes on the rich. They then raised University education fees by 300% (remember, about 10 years Universities were FREE in the UK, and even after that they were reasonably cheap). They cut public education, public heath and benefits for the poor. SureStart, a fantastic and free program for young children which is not only cheap but also proven to work (a SureStart child is 60% more likely to go to University than a normal child) was cut. Our Prime Minister made a speech saying that immigrants should learn English. Government-funded immigrant English courses were cut so immigrants couldn't learn English, and therefore were not able to get jobs. Look at what this government is doing - the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. A government run by the [i]Conservative[/i] Party. They make it harder for the poor to get a good education and easier for the rich.
[/quote]
Did you read my post?

What I said was that the really rich people are rich enough to avoid taxes. We need to focus on taxing huge corporations, (or rather, the persons making all the profit on those corporations) instead of just adjusting tax rates depending on whatever salary you make on paper. For example, let's take someone who makes 25 mil a year. He outsets his resources and cuts corners so he only pays $250,000 per year in taxes. Why not make him pay 15 mil a year or more?

Sure, that may seem like a lot of money to take, but look at what he keeps, $10,000,000. That's more than enough to live on. Hell, that's enough for two hundred people to live on. Letting people starve while some jackass drives eight different cars and lives in a mansion is sick.

I am a conservative in the grand scheme of things, but am quite liberal when compared to "conservatives" like the ones on Fox News.

[The Amazing Avian]

Ah, Democracy. The government ideal in which the people get to pick who fucks them over for the next few years. Gotta love it.

[Sunshine Jesse]

[quote name='ADHD-Guitar' timestamp='1303701484' post='5165963']
Did you read my post?

What I said was that the really rich people are rich enough to avoid taxes. We need to focus on taxing huge corporations, (or rather, the persons making all the profit on those corporations) instead of just adjusting tax rates depending on whatever salary you make on paper. For example, let's take someone who makes 25 mil a year. He outsets his resources and cuts corners so he only pays $250,000 per year in taxes. Why not make him pay 15 mil a year or more?

[b]Sure, that may seem like a lot of money to take, but look at what he keeps, $10,000,000. That's more than enough to live on. Hell, that's enough for two hundred people to live on. Letting people starve while some jackass drives eight different cars and lives in a mansion is sick.[/b]

[b]I am a conservative in the grand scheme of things,[/b] but am quite liberal when compared to "conservatives" like the ones on Fox News.
[/quote]
But that's pretty much the second most liberal thing stated in this topic o_o

[~/Coolio Prime\~]

All of the industrialized countries could do for some mass civil rights movements.

[Tentacruel]

[quote name='Nightmare Zarkus' timestamp='1303722406' post='5166405']
But that's pretty much the second most liberal thing stated in this topic o_o
[/quote]
I am a strong supporter of free practice of religion, including in public. (Barring any generally disruptive behavior.)

I believe that the legal definition of marriage should be described as a contract between partners of opposite gender. (However, any legal benefits should not be exclusive to traditional marriage.)

I am Pro-Life.

I support the right to bare arms and am against excessive gun control.


Most of all however, I find it silly to limit one's self to being entirely conservative or liberal. I find it much easier to believe what I believe with no hindrances. By American standards, a good number of my views would be considered liberal, but not all.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

[quote name='ADHD-Guitar' timestamp='1303786844' post='5168824']
I am a strong supporter of free practice of religion, including in public. (Barring any generally disruptive behavior.)
[/quote]

I am a strong supporter of free practice of religion, including in public. (Barring any free practice of religion, especially in public.)

[quote name='ADHD-Guitar' timestamp='1303786844' post='5168824']
I believe that the legal definition of marriage should be described as a contract between partners of opposite gender. (However, any legal benefits should not be exclusive to traditional marriage.)[/quote]

Gays'll still be pissed off with you.

[quote name='ADHD-Guitar' timestamp='1303786844' post='5168824']
I am Pro-Life.
[/quote]

Also pro-rape.

[quote name='ADHD-Guitar' timestamp='1303786844' post='5168824']
I support the right to bare arms and am against excessive gun control.
[/quote]

They're the same thing.

[~/Coolio Prime\~]

Hi Polaris.