I noticed that younger voters tend to be more liberal in their voting habits. This election is no different. I've seen report after report that Obama has a massive lead in the polls among younger voters.

My question is...why do younger folks tend to vote more liberal than older folks? The other question is...do you think older or younger voters are more informed and/or smarter?

The way I see it, on average, the more life experience you have the wiser your decision making will be. Do the statistics indicate that young voters are more easily misled? Is that why they vote more Democratic? Looks like it.

I was actually registered as Democrat early in my voting career - voted for Clinton, as a matter of fact.
The ideas sounded great at the time, and back then I didn't know enough to ask how any new programs would actually be implemented and/or paid for.
It took a number of years of living "in the real world" to become more cynical about Democratic programs and whether I felt they were realistic or not.
Not that I think the Republican party is perfect either, they certainly have their problems as well - which is why I'm not registered with either any longer...

Not that I think the Republican party is perfect either, they certainly have their problems as well...Indeed.

I noticed that younger voters tend to be more liberal in their voting habits. This election is no different. I've seen report after report that Obama has a massive lead in the polls among younger voters.

My question is...why do younger folks tend to vote more liberal than older folks? The other question is...do you think older or younger voters are more informed and/or smarter?

The way I see it, on average, the more life experience you have the wiser your decision making will be. Do the statistics indicate that young voters are more easily misled? Is that why they vote more Democratic? Looks like it.

Because modern day conservatism represents everything antithetical to youth, freedom, and independence.

It's also an erroneous conclusion to assume that many young people are liberal, but then gravitate more towards conservatism as they get older. What happens is, people tend to get "sucked" into the conservative conditioning in this country, usually from one or two positions, typically the abortion issue or taxes, imo.

Both of my parents were pretty liberal in their youth. They now consider themselves republicans. But when I tested them on that political compass site, they both ended up radically different from what they thought they would be. My mom ended up being a filthy leftist, and my dad ended up only slightly further to the right of her, a bit closer to center. Needless to say, this tweaked their brains in the worst way, and I had a great time pointing this out to them for weeks afterward. I especially enjoy calling them pinko communists.

They both are big fans of Fox News and spend a significant amount of time listening to right wing talk radio. I think being Catholic has something to do with it, mostly because of the abortion issue.

I realize this is anecdotal, but I think it's probably extremely common.

I think the young voter is easy to mislead. Most are not informed on real political issues. Most vote and react with a knee jerk reaction. Most are poll driven no matter what the issue is, just as Clinton ran his administration by using the polls the younger generation does the same. Most are influenced by slogans good and bad. All you have to do is read the slogans on their clothing or bumper stickers. Most really believe 99% of what they read.
To get away from all the above, maturity......
I also think the attack by both candidates will turn off the young voter, and most will not vote anyway.

Is that good or bad, you be the judge.

Because modern day conservatism represents everything antithetical to youth, freedom, and independence.

Not sure how you come up with that, if you think liberlism will set you free you are mistaken. Liberalism will squeeze your pocket book and drain every last dollar they can get and limit your freedom and independence by the amount of money you have to spend.

You don't believe this, how are we going to pay for National Health Care and other social agenda the liberals have in store for us.

I think most young people are moderate,independent and middle of the road.

From age 20 to age 30 I was a registered Independent and I voted for Republicans and Libertarians as well as for Democrats.

Two years of the abysmal presidency of Ronald Reagan was all I needed to become a Democrat,and I guess eight years of the most incompetent President who ever lived (namely George W. Bush) is why so many young people have become Democrats this year.

As far as social conservatives, because standards change. Old people become "conservative" when the ideas they had as young people are no longer in vogue. Then they're "conservative". They may not have changed their views at all, or, in fact, may have become more liberal than they were when they were young, but they aren't keeping up with the pace of change that society is, so they're "socially conservative".

Basically, "socially conservative" means "afraid of change", as old people are wont to be.

Alzheimers and Dementia

I believe we all tend to be much more idealistic and trusting in our youth.

Things like "hope and change' play on that, but as we grow up, we tend to wise up and realize that empty promises don't really amount to much.

There's and old saying that goes something like "if you're 21 and conservative, you have no heart, and if you're 45 and liberal, you have no brains".

There's and old saying that goes something like "if you're 21 and conservative, you have no heart, and if you're 45 and liberal, you have no brains".

No, there's an old saying that if you're 20 and you're not a rebel, you have no heart, and if you're 30 and not establishment, you have no brains. Rightwingers tried to take that over a few years ago. It's been floating around since the sixties the right way, since the Bush Administration, the rightwing way.

Since cardiovascular disease and cognitive impairment are related, this explains McCains lead in the 60+ bracket .. not to mention people who drive with their turn signals on constantly

Since cardiovascular disease and cognitive impairment are related, this explains McCains lead in the 60+ bracket .. not to mention people who drive with their turn signals on constantly

:nice:

I noticed that younger voters tend to be more liberal in their voting habits. This election is no different. I've seen report after report that Obama has a massive lead in the polls among younger voters.

My question is...why do younger folks tend to vote more liberal than older folks? The other question is...do you think older or younger voters are more informed and/or smarter?

The way I see it, on average, the more life experience you have the wiser your decision making will be. Do the statistics indicate that young voters are more easily misled? Is that why they vote more Democratic? Looks like it.

Its a myth really.

When I was young I identified with the Republicans and the Conservative movement.

I have seen the error of my ways and am a leftist.

But its more a matter of idealism. Young people are idealistic. Older people, especially wealthy older people are greedy.

But most retirees tend to return to liberalis because they realize that the conservatives dislike people who don't work and need social safety nets.

I noticed that younger voters tend to be more liberal in their voting habits. This election is no different. I've seen report after report that Obama has a massive lead in the polls among younger voters.

My question is...why do younger folks tend to vote more liberal than older folks? The other question is...do you think older or younger voters are more informed and/or smarter?

The way I see it, on average, the more life experience you have the wiser your decision making will be. Do the statistics indicate that young voters are more easily misled? Is that why they vote more Democratic? Looks like it.

Considering how un-wise conservatism is, the only thing age shows us is that wisdom has nothing to do with age. Most old farts I talk to are some of the most mis-informed retards that exist.

Not sure how you come up with that, if you think liberlism will set you free you are mistaken. Liberalism will squeeze your pocket book and drain every last dollar they can get and limit your freedom and independence by the amount of money you have to spend.

How is it when conservatism is what actually has raped the lower classes while re-distributing our wealth to the ultra-rich? And mounted an all out assault on the freedoms this nation was founded on?

Looks like you need to get your facts straight.

Who on Earth do you think is paying for the 2 trillion dollar Iraq war? That was brought to us by you goofy brainwashed conservatives.


You don't believe this, how are we going to pay for National Health Care and other social agenda the liberals have in store for us.

LOL, we pay more for no national health care than other nations that do have it. You, along with most everybody on the right has been fooled by huge corporate interests into putting their profits above your own life and the life of your family. They must love the fact that they have millions of dupes out there willing to sacrifice themselves for the corporatist religion.:nonono:

I believe we all tend to be much more idealistic and trusting in our youth.

Things like "hope and change' play on that, but as we grow up, we tend to wise up and realize that empty promises don't really amount to much.

There's and old saying that goes something like "if you're 21 and conservative, you have no heart, and if you're 45 and liberal, you have no brains".


Hmmmm, and Bush and his neo-con retards are the best you people can do?

Looks like the right has no brains at all, literally...

Hmmmm, and Bush and his neo-con retards are the best you people can do?


You do have to ask about that. There are 300,000,000 people in the US. About half are politically disinterested. The rest are split between Republican, Democrat, and Independent. That leaves at least 50,000,000 Republicans in America. Out of around 50,000,000 people, NO ONE was a better representative of Republican thinking than one George W. Bush. And it was unanimous. In 2004, not one single person in the entire party even put up another name for the nomination. Out of 50 million people, not a single one of them could think of anyone who they thought might better represent their thinking and their values than the Dubya.

That's a seriously weak group of people.

No, there's an old saying that if you're 20 and you're not a rebel, you have no heart, and if you're 30 and not establishment, you have no brains. Rightwingers tried to take that over a few years ago. It's been floating around since the sixties the right way, since the Bush Administration, the rightwing way.

That saying has been around since long before Bush was in office. I heard it in the late 70's.

And I love how lefties try to make "right wing" sound like something so negative. How about the religious left?? They exist. There are fanatical leftists in this country who actually want us all to become at best socialists, and at worst, communists. I believe that being left wing is far worse than being called right wing. In fact, liberal politicians won't even call themselves liberal in public, because they know full well that the electorate is centrist to right leaning; not centrist to left.

Liberals are the minority in the US. I just pray that it stays that way, and that when young liberals get older and realize that watch their is being swallowed up and pissed away on do gooder social programs that benefit a tiny minority of Americans, they'll abandon the idealism of their youth, along with their trust of politicians who promise them the world and vote for moderate to right leaning candidates.

If the liberals eventually reach numbers where they have nots and non producers gain control and vote the wealth out of the hands of the wealthy and into their own, the whole idea of America as we know it will be over, because the producers will stop producing and everything will collapse from within.

This is what Khrushchev meant when he said that the Soviets would take America without firing a shot. They believed that through infiltration of our media, entertainment industry and propaganda, that they could convince enough Americans to become communists and that eventually we would forge an alliance with them.

Thankfully, they couldn't have been more wrong and in their ignorance and lust for world domination, completely underestimated the power of something as simple as freedom, which is just part of the human spirit and human nature. They missed the whole point of America.

As far as social conservatives, because standards change. Old people become "conservative" when the ideas they had as young people are no longer in vogue. Then they're "conservative". They may not have changed their views at all, or, in fact, may have become more liberal than they were when they were young, but they aren't keeping up with the pace of change that society is, so they're "socially conservative".I think this might be a reasonable explaination.

Alzheimers and Dementia This is not a very reasonable explaination. When I talk about "older" voters...I mainly mean those in their late twenties and beyond (those who are old enough to know how the real world actually works and have to actually pay the taxes to cover all the pipedream liberal programs).

No, there's an old saying that if you're 20 and you're not a rebel, you have no heart, and if you're 30 and not establishment, you have no brains.



And that's pretty much what happend to me,when I was 16 I supported Mc Govern ,my dad supported Humphrey.

This year myself (and most people in my demographic)supported Hillary ,most youth supported Obama ,so you can say it was a role reversal.

The difference is in '72 my dad held his nose and voted for Nixon (whom he couldn't stand) ,while I will proudly vote for Obama.


That saying has been around since long before Bush was in office. I heard it in the late 70's.


And that saying is just as ignorant now as it was then,plus the original quote is just as true now as it has always been.


And I love how lefties try to make "right wing" sound like something so negative.


That's probabaly because conservatism has helped nobody but rich,corperate types.



How about the religious left?? They exist.


The religious left are not trying to legislate their religious beliefs on everybody else,the religious right are trying to do exactly that.


I believe that being left wing is far worse than being called right wing.


You are entitled to your delusions.:rolleyes:


Liberals are the minority in the US.


I don't think so for a couple of reasons:

While some people may be conservative on individual issues,polls show that most people are in favor of national health care,most people are in favor of abortion being legal,most people want us out of Iraq, and I could go on and on.

Second,demographics in the 90s favored the Republicans by a narrow margin(though it should also be noted the overwhelming majority of Americans were opposed to impeaching Bill Clinton over a blow job ,and a few Republicans lost re-election for impeaching Clinton,while no Democrats lost re-eelction for supporting Clinton).

I think this election will show a major demographic shift that will favor the Democrats this year and for years to come.



This is what Khrushchev meant when he said that the Soviets would take America without firing a shot. They believed that through infiltration of our media, entertainment industry and propaganda, that they could convince enough Americans to become communists and that eventually we would forge an alliance with them.


What drugs are you on?:crazy:

Since cardiovascular disease and cognitive impairment are related, this explains McCains lead in the 60+ bracket .. not to mention people who drive with their turn signals on constantly

Or liberals who drive aimlessly and never turn their's on at all.

How is it when conservatism is what actually has raped the lower classes while re-distributing our wealth to the ultra-rich? And mounted an all out assault on the freedoms this nation was founded on?

Looks like you need to get your facts straight.

Who on Earth do you think is paying for the 2 trillion dollar Iraq war? That was brought to us by you goofy brainwashed conservatives.

Excuse me! Get your facts straight. The war debt is not being payed by you or anyone in your tax bracket.
Taxpayers in the top 50% of all individual income pay 96.4% of all individual income tax, I will have you know.
And you in the bottom 50% only pay less than 4%. The so-called ultra-rich (top 5%) payed 53.8% of all individual income tax in this courtry. Where as you being in the bottom tax bracket pay only 3.6% and that information is from the Department of the Treasury.
The US corporate tax burden is the second highest in the world at nearly 40%That is one of the reasons that US jobs are being moved overseas. Your boy, Obama wants to increase that amount, so when more jobs are lost overseas, you will be respons\ible because of your vote and not conservatives. In fact if Obama is elected president he will redistribute wealth in this country, that my friend is called socalism. What do you think a wind fall profit tax is? Did you know that the national health care industry makes more money on their investment than the oil companies? So if you are going to throw around 'fact' at least get them straight. :confused:
I don't know what freedoms you personally have lost, maybe you can enlighen me. Since Obama voted for the Patriot Act, FISA and ever time for funding the war maybe you can explain your support for the man since he has supported those lost freedoms?

LOL, we pay more for no national health care than other nations that do have it. You, along with most everybody on the right has been fooled by huge corporate interests into putting their profits above your own life and the life of your family. They must love the fact that they have millions of dupes out there willing to sacrifice themselves for the corporatist religion.:nonono:

And all socialist country that have National Health Care pay for it with higher taxes. Some countries up and above 50% income tax and gas twice what we pay at the pump. If you are willing to pay that, be my guest. I'm not.

That's probabaly because conservatism has helped nobody but rich,corperate types.

The religious left are not trying to legislate their religious beliefs on everybody
You are entitled to your delusions.:rolleyes:




Conservatism ghas helped me tremendously, especially as far as my federal tax burdern goes. The Bush child tax credits have saved me, and millions of other working families a bundle in taxes, and I'm no "rich" corporate type" by a long shot.
And, the religious left absolutely wants the rest of the country to embrace their ideas, many of which are held by a minority, such as gay marriage, abortion on demand, even late term for minors without parental consent.

they want higher taxes on people who want fewer taxes, they want strict regulations where they are often unnecessary, as well as radical environmentalism that sometimes results in people being unable to build on their own land because of some enfdangered species, or that fact that water may collect in certain areas deeming it "wetlands".

Many leftists don't want the average citizen to be able to own guns because a tiny minority of those weapons may be used in the commission of crime, and have some false notion that the 2nd amendment has something to do with "hunting" or "sports".

But, maybe worst of all, the left promotes class envy, and rallies it's base with this cry to "get even" with the wealthy and successful.They have convinced an entire sizable segment of society that they're somehow "entitled" to the earnings of their fellow citizens. That boggles my mind.

I cannot begin to comprehend how anyone can actually believe this; that those who happen to have worked hard and become successful should be compelled by law to give away a portion of their profits to those who haven't done as well. This is nothing but legalized extortion, and the penalty can be prison.

How has a free country gotten to this point??

The left wants to impose it's own ideology on the country as much as the right does. It's so blatantly obvious that to deny it is either dishonest, or completely ignorant to the truth.

If those on the left believe in this philosophy, fine, but they shouldn't try and pretend it doesn't exist. The left is the home of the real socialists, and in some cases, even communists in America, so if that's what the left wants, then they should at least be proud of their position and openly admit it, instead of being afraid of even calling themselves "liberals" publicly, like most left wing politicians are.

They try to pass themselves off as "progressives" these days. Any fool can see right through that. Why don't they proudly proclaim themselves to be liberals?? What do they fear in doing so??

But the real hypocrites are these politicians who just love to bash "the rich" when in fact, are bashing themselves. Most are wealthy lawyers and business people who are sitting on millions. They have more money than most of us will ever see in a lifetime, so why pretend they're "one of us"?? They're not. Obama isn't, he's lived a relatively privileged life, and Bill Clinton never was either. Hillary was writing off Bills used underwear to save on her tax bill for God's sake. Who do they think they're fooling? (apparently, more people than I would have ever imagined) Why do people buy into these blatant lies and this hypocritical behavior, and look to these people as though they're some sort of godsend??

And I don't care that they're millionaires. I congratulate them on their financial success. It just amazes me how they go about bashing the rich when they are the very rich. that they love to bash. It never ends either. They do it year after year because it works. They just play on people's emotions and envy. it's not because they really care about the little guy; quite the contrary. They need to keep the little guy down in order to maintain their base.

That saying has been around since long before Bush was in office. I heard it in the late 70's


No, it was always "rebel" and "establishment", not "conservative" and "liberal". I'd be willing to see who can find the earliest reference to either one. Switching it from 'rebel' to 'liberal' and 'establishment' to 'conservative' was a piece of propaganda, and a new one.


And I love how lefties try to make "right wing" sound like something so negative.


Because it is.


If the liberals eventually reach numbers where they have nots and non producers gain control and vote the wealth out of the hands of the wealthy and into their own, the whole idea of America as we know it will be over, because the producers will stop producing and everything will collapse from within.


Roofles. "Producers". People who are born rich and live off the interest income are "producers", and union workers who build cars and pull coal from the earth are "nonproducers".

The "producers" are the working class. Not the capital owners. Those guys take all the profits from the work of the labor, not the other way around. No board member at GM can build a truck . . . it's the labor that does the actual producing. The capital owners just suck up all the profits. If you think they'll ever threaten to stop doing that, you're going to be waiting a long time.

There's so much wrong with this I'm not going to be able to get it all.

Conservatism ghas helped me tremendously, especially as far as my federal tax burdern goes. The Bush child tax credits have saved me, and millions of other working families a bundle in taxes, and

No. They just financed it. You'll still have to pay it, just now . . with interest.


And, the religious left absolutely wants the rest of the country to embrace their ideas, many of which are held by a minority, such as gay marriage, abortion on demand, even late term for minors without parental consent.


They don't want you to embrace them, they want you to let them make their own choices, while you're still free to make your own choices. THat's what freedom is.


they want strict regulations where they are often unnecessar


Just above, you're saying you want to regulate other people's lives, and are mad that "the left" won't let you.


they want higher taxes on people who want fewer taxes


People "want" a lot. You wanted to attack Iraq. You want weapons programs. You want prisons and border fences and increased federal spy networks. You want a lot. You'll have to pay a lot. If you want lower taxes, then stop voting for people like Reagan and Bush.


radical environmentalism that sometimes results in people being unable to build on their own land because of some enfdangered species, or that fact that water may collect in certain areas deeming it "wetlands".


That's not "radical". If you damage your land, and that leaks into my land, then you've damaged my land. That's what the regulation is about.


Many leftists don't want the average citizen to be able to own guns because a tiny minority of those weapons may be used in the commission of crime, and have some false notion that the 2nd amendment has something to do with "hunting" or "sports".


I'll agree with that. The rest of this is hysterical propaganda, though. You should stop listening to Rush (or whoever it is that's telling you all this crap).


But, maybe worst of all, the left promotes class envy, and rallies it's base with this cry to "get even" with the wealthy and successful.They have convinced an entire sizable segment of society that they're somehow "entitled" to the earnings of their fellow citizens. That boggles my mind.

I cannot begin to comprehend how anyone can actually believe this; that those who happen to have worked hard and become successful should be compelled by law to give away a portion of their profits to those who haven't done as well. This is nothing but legalized extortion, and the penalty can be prison.


EVERYONE is. We're back to that federal spending. Rightwingers always want to have bigger armies and more nukes and more cops and more prisons and more wars and more spying . . . yet they don't want to pay taxes. You big-government rightwingers are half the reason that those taxes are so high.


The left wants to impose it's own ideology on the country as much as the right does. It's so blatantly obvious that to deny it is either dishonest, or completely ignorant to the truth.


By "impose their ideology", I think you mean, "not let rightwingers impose their ideology".


The left is the home of the real socialists, and in some cases, even communists in America, so if that's what the left wants, then they should at least be proud of their position and openly admit it, instead of being afraid of even calling themselves "liberals" publicly, like most left wing politicians are.


Oh, for cryin' out loud. The Red Scare is over. Cool off a bit.


They try to pass themselves off as "progressives" these days. Any fool can see right through that.

[I have to skip this one]


But the real hypocrites are these politicians who just love to bash "the rich"

[ . . . ]

It just amazes me how they go about bashing the rich when they are the very rich. that they love to bash. It never ends either. They do it year after year because it works.


Just out of curiosity, who are all these politicians who keep "bashing the rich"? Where is this "bashing"?

The "producers" are the working class. Not the capital owners. Those guys take all the profits from the work of the labor, not the other way around. No board member at GM can build a truck . . . it's the labor that does the actual producing. The capital owners just suck up all the profits. If you think they'll ever threaten to stop doing that, you're going to be waiting a long time.

Those big wigs running corporations also create hundreds of thousands of jobs for those workers, and put billions of dollars at risk to do it. They also have to answer to their shareholders, the unions, etc. Also, no one forces anyone to work for these people. They want those jobs, so why should they bitch about the fact that the people who created the jobs are making more money?? The owners should make more money. If they didn't, what would be the point of going into business in the first place??

At this point in time, overwhelming majority of American millionaires are self made; not living off of trust funds and old money. There are more millionaires than ever before in the US, and more are becoming millionaires every day.

This notion of old money financing the wealthy is a thing of the past.
I read an article in Readers Digest about two months ago about a 17 year old kid who started a corporation a few years ago and is now a multi millionaire. He designs and sells IPOD accessories all over the world.

His parents mortgaged their house for his start up money. It was around 160,000 dollars. They believed in him, and he didn't let them down. Even if he had, they chose to take the risk. they could have lost it all, but they didn't, and now they're reaping a hefty return on their investment.

Almost anyone can make it ion this country if they work hard and have the right attitude, but buying into the victim mentality will get them victimhood and failure every time.

This is why I oppose the liberal/socialist mindset. There are way too many victims and those who never bought into such nonsense get blamed for creating them.

I'll never teach my children that anyone owes them anything, or that there is nothing that they cannot attain if they want it bad enough.

The difference between liberalism and conservatism is just a mindset. The left looks to government for solutions to all manners of problems and claims that everyone is entitled to certain things, and those things change all the time, depending upon the political situation and frankly, what's popular at any given time.

The right focuses on individual rights and the potential of every individual, and doesn't tell anyone they can't succeed without aid from the government, or because they happen to belong to a minority group, because they were born into a poor family, or didn't get a decent education etc.

When we get into the business of labeling people, people will become whatever that label says they are; you can bet on it. This is why you don't tell your children they're bad. You do the opposite and encourage them, praise them and reward them for doing good, as well as teach them how to learn from their failures, because everyone fails at something sooner or later; it's part of life, but it's not the end of the world and it's often the best education some people will ever get.

I have to say that conservatism is a far more optimistic way of looking at life, whereas liberalism carries with it so much defeat and victimhood. I remember watching the democratic convention back in 2000, and it was probably one of the most depressing, downbeat gatherings I have ever witnessed. There was more complaining, more victims, more pessimism than I had ever seen. No thanks. Life's too short to jump on that bandwagon.

Well, yes. I would say Betrade makes a wonderful point. If you totally ignore the meaning of most of the words, at least.

Those big wigs running corporations also create hundreds of thousands of jobs for those workers


No, customers do.


put billions of dollars at risk to do it.


Billions they took from profits generated by labor.


no one forces anyone to work for these people.


Never said they did. I just said that the producers are the producers, not the shareholders. The ones building the cars and mining the coal are the one's who produce something. The shareholders don't "produce" profits, they "take" profits.

Auto workers can build cars without the shareholders taking profits. Shareholders can't take profits without the auto workers building cars. One is a parasite, one is a producer. You're upside down.


the people who created the jobs


Owners don't create jobs. Markets create jobs. Unless you think the owners created the markets, but I'd love to hear you explain that one.


The owners should make more money. If they didn't, what would be the point of going into business in the first place??


To avoid doing work. That's the whole point to leaching profits off of the producers.


At this point in time, overwhelming majority of American millionaires are self made; not living off of trust funds and old money. There are more millionaires than ever before in the US, and more are becoming millionaires every day.


Got any stats on that? I haven't been able to find anything that supports or refutes that notion.


Almost anyone can make it ion this country if they work hard and have the right attitude


No, attitude won't help you. You need investment capital.

Whoever has you convinced that you'll get rich if you have the right attitude, and that the right attitude is to bend over and take it up the arse by Republicans . . . was most likely a Republican.

Well, yes. I would say Betrade makes a wonderful point. If you totally ignore the meaning of most of the words, at least.

LOL....that was pretty good.

Can someone explain to my why, if the Democrats are so bad for the economy, that we have losses of jobs, runaway inflation and the worst housing crises I can remember under Bush. Also why was it that under Clinton we had people working and a ballanced budget?

I am no supporter of Clinton but he did keep the economy humming along.

As I see it, Bush did to the US Economy what Clinton did to Monica Lewinsky.

Monica does anal?

Can someone explain to my why, if the Democrats are so bad for the economy, that we have losses of jobs, runaway inflation and the worst housing crises I can remember under Bush. Also why was it that under Clinton we had people working and a ballanced budget?

I am no supporter of Clinton but he did keep the economy humming along.

As I see it, Bush did to the US Economy what Clinton did to Monica Lewinsky.

It should be noted that Bush is no more a Republican that "I" am.

Remember, he is the front man for the Neo-Cons, who co-opted the Republican party like a cancer would do to a healthy tissue.

That puts the current Republican party in the position of being a profoundly afflicted organism.

(Not that they didn't have leanings towards what they became.)

Can someone explain to my why, if the Democrats are so bad for the economy, that we have losses of jobs, runaway inflation and the worst housing crises I can remember under Bush.



And don't forget that this mess started (and continued) with a Republican President,Republican House and Republican Senate.


Also why was it that under Clinton we had people working and a ballanced budget?


I was much better off fiscally with Clinton in the White House than I am now.



As I see it, Bush did to the US Economy what Clinton did to Monica Lewinsky.


Wrong,Clinton and Lewinsky were consenting adults.

What Bush has done to the economy is damn close to forcible rape.

To avoid doing work. That's the whole point to leaching profits off of the producers.

Have you ever MET a business owner and observed what they have to do in order for their business to be successful? They work harder than any shift worker who clocks out after 8 hours and goes home.

Got any stats on that? I haven't been able to find anything that supports or refutes that notion.

The Millionaire Next Door: The Surprising Secrets of American's Wealthy
by THOMAS J. STANLEY and WILLIAM D. DANKO

Whoever has you convinced that you'll get rich if you have the right attitude, and that the right attitude is to bend over and take it up the arse by Republicans . . . was most likely a Republican.

Whoever convinced you that you cannot become wealthy in America was a freakin' idiot, and most likely a democrat, but I repeat myself.

Have you ever MET a business owner and observed what they have to do in order for their business to be successful?


Almost everyone in my family is a business owner. I'm not so much thinking of small, independent businesses, but of corporations and their shareholders and boards. They don't work a second. Not one. They do nothing except suck up profits.

Almost everyone in my family is a business owner. I'm not so much thinking of small, independent businesses, but of corporations and their shareholders and boards. They don't work a second. Not one. They do nothing except suck up profits.

Perhaps. People at the top rarely stop at 8 hours a day, though, whether they started the company or not. Investors are risking their money and providing capital for the company to grow. In fact, a lot of those so-called profit suckers are retirement funds. Tax them more heavily and you cut into the working class's ability to provide for their retirement. When I worked at Circuit City, that was a big concern. If the stock price dropped too far, the funds would pull out and REALLY drop the price. Raising the capital gains tax can have the same effect. It's not just fat cats that invest any more.

Perhaps. People at the top rarely stop at 8 hours a day, though, whether they started the company or not. Investors are risking their money and providing capital for the company to grow. In fact, a lot of those so-called profit suckers are retirement funds. Tax them more heavily and you cut into the working class's ability to provide for their retirement. When I worked at Circuit City, that was a big concern. If the stock price dropped too far, the funds would pull out and REALLY drop the price. Raising the capital gains tax can have the same effect. It's not just fat cats that invest any more.

Raising the capital gains tax and lowering the earned-income tax would be more beneficial to people who work for a living than doing the opposite would.

Got any stats on that? I haven't been able to find anything that supports or refutes that notion.


Roughly 80% of American millionaires are first generation, according to that Ultra right wing source, The Washington Post. There were on average roughly 550 new millionaires created every day in 07'.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/longterm/books/chap1/millionairenextdoor.htm

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080313125057AAUgr7S


That "old money" mantra excuse just doesn't hold water anymore, and neither does the class envy. People aren't buying it anymore like they used to because frankly, most Americans are getting along okay, despite all of the negativity we hear day in and day out.

Are times tough?? Of course they are, and they always will be for some people, but overall, Americans are living decent lives, even if they don't have everything they want. Most of us have roofs over our heads, food to eat, one or two vehicles, cable or satellite TV, computers, internet access, etc. Compared to most of the humans in this world the overwhelming majority of us are living like kings.

But we're also never satisfied, so we complain when times get a little rough for a year or two, as though it's the end of the world.

Raising the capital gains tax and lowering the earned-income tax would be more beneficial to people who work for a living than doing the opposite would.

Most beneficial to all would be lowering both taxes.

Most beneficial to all would be lowering both taxes.

Can't do that. We're already $9 TRILLION dollars in the hole because we don't tax enough. In order to lower taxes, we have to lower spending, and that doesn't only mean spending on social programs, it also means spending on police and military and all the other stuff. Neither side wants to do that. They both only want to lower the other side.

Democrats get elected. Republicans get elected. They both have to run extremely expensive campaigns to do that. The people who pay for those campaigns, be it teachers unions or arms dealers, aren't doing it out of the kindness of their big ol' hearts. It's an investment, and they expect a return on it.

That's why you'll never see Democrats cut spending for their backers, and you'll never see Republicans cut spending for theirs. Democrats will always want raises for teachers, and Republicans will always want to have a war (or any excuse they can find to give money to their backers).

So, until we cut spending for social safety nets and education, and weapons and military expansion, we have to raise tax revenue to pay for it.

Since we're never going to get either side to cut it's own side's spending, we can't cut taxes.

When you were demanding an invasion and occupation of Iraq, who did you think was going to pay for it? You want a massive sweep and deportation? Who's going to pay for it? You. How about a border fence, staffed with soldiers and closed circuit television? You gotta pay for it. How about more prisons? They're expensive. Fork it up.

That's never going to change, so as long as Republicans insist on borrow-and-spend policies, the debt is going to grow (as it always does under Republicans), and eventually destabalize the US economy. Then, when we have another depression, you'll finally get out of paying taxes ('cause you won't have a job).

In the mean time, following the Republican plan to only tax money you work for, not money you don't work for, is extremely unjust.

See, I don't understand why all of us should be punished for our governments incompetence and mistakes. Why should we have to fix their problems by allowing them to continue robbing us blind?

We're 9 trillion in debt because of completely reckless spending on their part.

We're 9 trillion in debt because of completely reckless spending on their part.

We're 9 trillion in debt because of completely stupid voting on our part.

We're 9 trillion in debt because of completely stupid voting on our part.

The idiots who voted for these clowns are the ones who should be punished financially, they should all have their taxes increased to pay for everything that they voted for and supported. Not the people who were smart enough to not vote for them.

If people had to be held accountable for who and what they voted for, I'd love to see how many of these "smart" conservatives would continue being republicans. My guess is, NONE.

The idiots who voted for these clowns are the ones who should be punished financially, they should all have their taxes increased to pay for everything that they voted for and supported. Not the people who were smart enough to not vote for them.

I'd love to see that happen. I swear I would.

I've been thinking, lately, that you just have to look at it as market activity. I've been considering the plausibility of investing in war and failure if McCain is elected. Invest in military companies to take the short profit, then, as that starts to slide, invest in foreign currency, so I'm safe when the US collapses, then buy back dollars once they're worth half a Peso.

Or just invest in companies that can keep their market even if the US fails.

We're 9 trillion in debt because of completely stupid voting on our part.

This is true .. we have elected a series of "starve the beast" repubs starting with Reagan .. and it is not a coincidence the debt skyrocketed starting there

I believe the GOP truly wish to wreck the govt by a combination of neglect (infrastructure), corruption (K street), outsourcing (KBR - Blackwater), incompetence (Katrina relief, DHS) and starvation (tax-cuts)

The goal seems to be elimination of every govt function except for "security": surveillance , penal and the military .. and outsourcing those functions to contractors and mercenaries

If / when that neo-fascist nightmare comes to pass .. the voters have no one to blame but themselves

The idiots who voted for these clowns are the ones who should be punished financially, they should all have their taxes increased to pay for everything that they voted for and supported. Not the people who were smart enough to not vote for them.

If people had to be held accountable for who and what they voted for, I'd love to see how many of these "smart" conservatives would continue being republicans. My guess is, NONE.

If you believe that then you better go back a very long time, like back to a brief period during the Andrew Jackson administration, which was the last (and only) time the US carried no national debt. Once we created the federal reserve system, it was all over. It's an inflationary, debt creating system.

The real culprit in our current debt is compound interest and this debt was predicted 30 years ago. It was a mathematical certainty then and it's only going to get worse from here. It hit critical mas years ago and is doubling at an incredible rate. The law of 72 works with debt as well as investments.

http://www.retirement-planning.com/pages/3048/Magic_Law_of_72.htm

Under our current monetary system the debt cannot be repaid. It's impossible. We just throw money away to make interest payments.

I have to take issue with this belief that all young people are somehow liberal, everywhere I go the younger people are that I talk to the more completely CLUELESS they are about everything and the more conservative they are. I don't know if it's a new thing or what, but everybody I talk to that graduated high school the past few years all sound like indoctrinated lemmings that get all their information from places like Fox news and Youtube. And they not anything resembling liberal. No matter what age, background, whatever, the more informed and intelligent, the more liberal people are.

No matter what age, background, whatever, the more informed and intelligent, the more liberal people are.

Do you mean the more intelligent, or the more schooled? The two are not necessarily directly related.