It's greedy of you to demand well kept infrastructure and the like but bitch about taxes constantly. Seriously - no wonder NHS is so much better than anything the US offers. :rofl
Meh ... I'll take your word on it then. I think your statement that libertarians believe "laziness and government handouts are the main cause of poverty" is a gross oversimplification, but I am too lazy right now to go down that road with you.There was once a website that comprehensively detailed charity by both geography, religion, and political ideology, but it has been buried under an avalanche of partisan articles. Social conservatives in evangelical populations were highest, libertarians were lowest. Or maybe Christian liberals and libertarians were about equal and atheistic libertarians were lowest.
However, on intuition, there is no reason to believe libertarians give a great deal to charity. The Republican charity numbers are inflated by the systematic charity of the evangelical church network; libertarians would only be party to that to the extent they are participants in the evangelical culture, which they generally are not. Libertarianism is dominant among a completely different kind of American. Evangelicals, for example, are much more favorable to both imperialism and to government welfare and intervention than libertarians.
How does the NEA contribute to the infrastructure in Illinois or Chicago? Please, enlighten me.
General perception?No,it's the reality I see every day among people I interact with.....All of which happen to be Democrats.
"Goldman Sachs (GS, Fortune 500), Bank of New York/Mellon (BK, Fortune 500), Wells Fargo (WFC, Fortune 500), JP Morgan Chase (JPM, Fortune 500) and Bank of America (BAC, Fortune 500) - all 'mega-banks' that the government forced to take bailout money - say they want to return taxpayer funds "as soon as practical.""
Bankers: Take your TARP money back - Mar. 27, 2009
Indeed, libertarians are among the least giving of Americans, which is what you would anticipate of people who are constantly arguing laziness and government handouts are the main cause of poverty.
I certainly hope every Republican who makes that observation gives generously to charity. I doubt it though.
Republicans only give more to charity because they encompass the evangelical population, whose churches are highly refined charity machines. Republicans outside the social conservative demographic aren't remarkable for their charity. Indeed, libertarians are among the least giving of Americans, which is what you would anticipate of people who are constantly arguing laziness and government handouts are the main cause of poverty.
Who's talking about Jesus? I'm talking about the fundie hypochristians that tarnish the names of intelligent Republicans.
Business is sufficiently distributed throughout the United States that infrastructure in any particular region pertains to prosperity somewhere else.
No, you're just rendering yourselves utterly irrelevant by ignoring the majority of Americans and shoving your radical leftist agenda down our collective throat.
You called republicans intelligent? Its a sign that miracles do happen.
You support Democrats.
That means you're a socialist. A socialist in denial, perhaps, but a socialist none the less.
Which means you support fascism, since "free" markets are government controlled.
Free markets are not government controlled.
Good for you.
Most of us haymakers don't owe society anything. It's what being adult is all about.
Its funny, but the people who refer to capitalists as "monkeys" don't have a clue what appropriate regulation is. For some reason, these ignorant people think it means "government control" and other forms of fascism/socialism.
The rest of us recognize that true capitalism is based on limited government to protect the peole from the criminal types of behavior socialism and anarchy naturally produce.
If the majority of Americans want something they should do the right thing and get politically involved - apathy is the problem.
You don't mean "Enlightenment attitudes", you mean socailist attitudes.
The Constitution of the United States, blatantly pro-freedom and hence anti-socialist, the visible peak of the Englightenment.
Many people got involved in the last election. The voted for " Change you can believe in". Transparency in government; kick out the lobbyists etc.
How did that go?
Hate to say it, but popularism played a large part in the last election - by involved I mean being educated about it, which popularism does not necessarily entail.
The "new voters" that voted for Obama are the same people that text vote 100 times for American Idol. This last election was nothing more than a glorified American Idol contest.
There wasn't a lick of historical or civics knowledge among most of them.
Likewise? :rofl
Some made an educated choice in their votes, many did not.
Never ran so much as a company or firm. Never introduced a bill in state or federal government. Ran for president on a resume that couldn't fill out a 3x5 index card. Yet he wrote two memoirs about accomplishing nothing.
You're going to have to explain where the "educated" is in that vote.
Don't disagree with your intended point, but you're confusing education and experience. Obama is very educated, but he's never done anything that would qualify him to be a good president.Never ran so much as a company or firm. Never introduced a bill in state or federal government. Ran for president on a resume that couldn't fill out a 3x5 index card. Yet he wrote two memoirs about accomplishing nothing.
You're going to have to explain where the "educated" is in that vote.
To understand that you have to understand the most pressing issue at the election period - the economy. Intelligent people understand the economy runs off confidence, hence the educated decision is to vote for the confidence booster.
To understand that you have to understand the most pressing issue at the election period - the economy. Intelligent people understand the economy runs off confidence, hence the educated decision is to vote for the confidence booster.
Don't disagree with your intended point, but you're confusing education and experience. Obama is very educated, but he's never done anything that would qualify him to be a good president.
This election had nothing to do with the economy. It was based solely on skin color, Oprah, and the momentum of a clueless group of people who slept through past elections but wanted to make history, go to a big party, and buy the concert T-shirt.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?