Nope, it's just a different witch hunt than the Cons pull.Looking to expose the worst Devil of the two, I don’t see it as nagging, but rather healthy free debate.:smile:
Nope, it's just a different witch hunt than the Cons pull.Looking to expose the worst Devil of the two, I don’t see it as nagging, but rather healthy free debate.:smile:
That's why we think it'd be cool to get rid of parties and have dozens of indies.I don't see where it makes any difference- all the local candidates will probably be told to toe the party line and one of the local candidates is going to get elected. There is not much use even considering who the leader is, we all know he's bound to be an A$$hole, so personally on the Federal level I don't much care which party gets in but between the four local guys who are going to be toeing the party line, I'd at least vote for the one who I think is the least of the four evils.
That last paragraph is what creates hardship, in society, the ones who get shoved to the bottom are many, they need food, clothing, they need health care, they need housing, they need jobs. ...................when the poor suffer from these essentials the country or the politicians responsible don’t have much to be proud about, at the end of the day.
But but but but the politicians do it and say it is ok so that's good enough for the rest of us, right?What I find interesting is the confession of one 'rich' person that they personally benefit, but don't feel guilty, although they are happy to blame the conservatives for abusing 'the poor' and making 'the rich' richer...but no mention of, say, donating all of that money to the poor to make up for it.
That's the attitude I love: I'm personally benefitting, and I feel it's wrong, so I won't DO anything about it, I'll just complain about the government.
I'm not sure it's the politicians who should be ashamed of themselves.
That's why we think it'd be cool to get rid of parties and have dozens of indies.
Same for the loony left, I guess. Sad.But then the "religious right" would be without a home.........................:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
"But then the "religious right" would be without a home."
Of course, so would the immoral, atheist Left.
What I find interesting is the confession of one 'rich' person that they personally benefit, but don't feel guilty, although they are happy to blame the conservatives for abusing 'the poor' and making 'the rich' richer...but no mention of, say, donating all of that money to the poor to make up for it.
That's the attitude I love: I'm personally benefitting, and I feel it's wrong, so I won't DO anything about it, I'll just complain about the government.
I'm not sure it's the politicians who should be ashamed of themselves.
Hey, if the government is foolish enough to give me money, I will take it. But why should I donate it all to charity? The right solution is to vote the government out of office, not to donate everything to charity and be done with it.
Donating everything to charity is not the solution, it does not solve the problem of transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich, which is happening big time under Harper. The solution is to vote Harper out of office, so that the transfer of wealth from the single mother on minimum wage to the rich billionaire playboy ceases.
Liberalism is bankrupting States like it is doing to countries in Europe. Liberalism is like a creeping fungus on life that steals from you with out any benefit other than to itself.
California, New York and other states are showing many of the same signs of debt overload that recently took Greece to the brink -- budgets that will not balance, accounting that masks debt, the use of derivatives to plug holes, and armies of retired public workers who are counting on benefits that are proving harder and harder to pay.
And states are responding in sometimes desperate ways, raising concerns that they, too, could face a debt crisis.
New Hampshire was recently ordered by its State Supreme Court to put back $110 million that it took from a medical malpractice insurance pool to balance its budget. Colorado tried, so far unsuccessfully, to grab a $500 million surplus from Pinnacol Assurance, a state workers' compensation insurer that was privatized in 2002. It wanted the money for its university system and seems likely to get a lesser amount, perhaps $200 million.
state-debt-woes-grow-too-big-to-camouflage: Personal Finance News from Yahoo! Finance
Indeed. The solution of the 'transfer of wealth from poor to rich' certainly would not include a self-described rich person donating this money to the poor.
That is totally unacceptable.
The correct solution is to blame someone else, and do nothing that requires any personal sacrifice or effort. That is the way, the light, the truth.
Hey, if the government is foolish enough to give me money, I will take it. But why should I donate it all to charity? The right solution is to vote the government out of office, not to donate everything to charity and be done with it.
Donating everything to charity is not the solution, it does not solve the problem of transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich, which is happening big time under Harper. The solution is to vote Harper out of office, so that the transfer of wealth from the single mother on minimum wage to the rich billionaire playboy ceases.
For that to work, most wealthy people must agree to donate the money, an impossible task. A much better solution is to get rid fo the perpetrator, namely the Conservative government.
"But then the "religious right" would be without a home."
Of course, so would the immoral, atheist Left.
So you don't think that the person who works hard, studies hard, invests well and is willing to take risks is deserving of wealth? As the old saying goes you can not do the poor one iota of good by hurting the rich. That is an old Socialist wives tale.
Harper government is taking from the poor and giving to the rich. In my opinion that is wrong, though that is the classic conservative philosophy.
It doesn't fit into mainstream belief. lol To some, it is even something to fear.Hey Y.J. Is there something wrong with being an atheist (agnostic if you want to get technical)?
roflmao As if the Glibs haven't practised the same thing.Hey, if the government is foolish enough to give me money, I will take it. But why should I donate it all to charity? The right solution is to vote the government out of office, not to donate everything to charity and be done with it.
Donating everything to charity is not the solution, it does not solve the problem of transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich, which is happening big time under Harper. The solution is to vote Harper out of office, so that the transfer of wealth from the single mother on minimum wage to the rich billionaire playboy ceases.