Coos Bay Tom Loc: coos bay oregon

It is supposed to be illegal. why is it still happening?

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

It seems to be cyclical. First it is one group then the other. It is not something I have completed sufficient research about.

Artemis

These are some of the commonalities that both can find agreement on. The left, though they may be for helping through social programs, like the right ,also don't want to see programs exploited from undeserving people abusing the system. That condition will always exist and it will always have be addressed and managed.

There is plenty of waste to go around, and I think we all have a list and just like any home when things get tight look to see where the waste is coming from and cut it.

On the other hand, we don't want to see the budget for education cut, again, there are probably over expenditures here too. We don't have to spend more money to offer a better education. We're faltering here, we need observe what is working from other places, review it and incorporate what we could use, here.

One other misconception of the left from the right, and that is personal responsibility. The left would like every
American to be productive and self supportive for not only him/herself but for their entire family also.

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

On this, I will totally disagree. I would jump and leap with joyous abandon if they would cut the Dept. Of Ed. budget by 40%. We are not "faltering" we have failed. The employees at the department are so far removed from the reality of the classroom they have zero "value added" component (just had to throw in the No Child Left Behind quote. One size does not fit all and especially in education. If you wish, I can do an entire diatribe on parents and curriculum.

Artemis

Very true, and I often wonder what would have happened if we didn't bail out the banks for their greedy mishandling of loans. Their was no punishment there, instead they got paid for misleading people and than again by our tax money. Maybe it should have been survival of the fittest, but that probably would have led to more monopolies or oligopolies.

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

But, it did lead to more monopolies. Several regional large banks merged or were bought, ie. Wells Fargo buying Wachovia.

Let us talk about the phrase "to big to fail". Slightly long story. I do not remember which smallish city. I read this several years ago.A local church budget committee met. They took a serious look at fees, interest rates, etc. one of the committee members mentioned the small local bank he used. They entered into discussions with the smaller bank. Obtained better rates, less fees, better customer service etc. all this occurred during the banking issue. The budget committee informed the congregants of the change, why and new better benefit. They also recommended to the congregants, where possible, to consider changing their personal accounts or business if such was applicable. End result, Bank of America closed their branch in the community, local community bank grew but still retained their business model. Hmmm...who said they cannot fail if there is a viable alternative.

Tasine Loc: Southwest US

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I am brand new on this site, and I welcome the invitation to join it. Thank you, Glaucon. I love discussion, love getting to the heart of matters, love give and take. I will tell everyone up front that most of what I believe, what I think, what philosophies by which I live are of my personal making. No politician tells me what to think, how to vote, what to like or what to dislike. I am a doer more than a talker, and I have no respect for liars or tricksters. I have no respect for college educations as most of them in my view are not much of an education. Do I have one? Yes, I do. Has it helped me in life? No, it hasn't.

I have been to one TEA Party meeting, and had a wonderful time. No rowdiness, no messes, no fighting, nothing but very nice people sitting about in their lawn chairs beneath trees in Waco, Texas, talking about the affairs of the nation. There was no cursing, no insults hurled, nothing negative happening except trying to find some sense to all the wasted money Congress manages to lose every year. There were plenty of policemen standing around - they didn't bother us, we didn't bother them. There were no scuffles, no arguments, no messes, whatsoever. Just a pleasant bunch of people who feel the politics of our nation are growing entirely too oppressive, and we know from history than oppression grows naturally and does not recede naturally. Oppression is wisely watched and discouraged if one likes living in a free country.

I am on the political right. Have been for decades, but never saw much in the way of issues re left vs right until Bill Clinton was elected President. Even then, my issue was more with Hillary than with Bill. For the first time in my life I was aware that some of the people in office had disdain for what I considered the American way of life. She had great disdain for our military people and for people in general. She had been an activist as a young person and she brought that to the office of the President of the United States. Things in this country have only gone downhill since that time.

Some have mentioned money. I cannot speak for anyone but myself and those I know well. I have never had any problems with welfare, with EPA, with the field of education until recent years - and the issue isn't the money, but the arrogant attitude of those taking and wasting my money. I see myself as a generous person and have spent a lifetime helping others, both professionally and in my private life because I love people. What I do not love are those who make demands of me to do my charity their way. I don't see the political right as selfish in any respect, I see us as people with common sense and the desire to see resources used properly rather than wasted. Every welfare dollar wasted is a dollar that could solve a temporary hunger of some child. Every dollar wasted on expensive toilets for some elected official is a dollar that could be put to better use. Every dollar increased in minimum wage should be viewed as a dollar deducted from the more capable and dedicated employee who is worth a higher salary. When there is no incentive to improve one's self, sloth is usually the result. Additionally, increasing minimum wage does virtually nothing for the minimum wage person. With every minimum wage increase, prices of practically everything goes up - and those costs also go up for the minimum wage person. Raises in minimum wage laws are, in my view, little more than a circular firing squad. Raises in minimum wage laws primarily result in higher prices across the board for every American citizen. No adult should be working for minimum wage by choice. He should be advancing his knowledge, his worth, his capabilities thereby earning more than minimum wage.

I have a lady who helps me with housework every other week. I pay her $15.00 per hour, not because she demands it or even requests it, but because she is worth it. I don't view her as my "hired hand". I view her as a master housekeeper who is valuable to me, and if I could pay her more, I would. I have never, from my pocket, paid anyone minimum wage. If a person isn't worth more than minimum wage, I would rather find someone who is worth more. In my nursing career when I had great helpers who were worth more than they were paid, but when someone else was determining wages, I encouraged them to get ahead and helped them find the way to become worth more than minimum wage. That is what the political right believes in - find a way out of poverty, not a way to make poverty easier.

Again, thank you for the invitation. I welcome responses to comments I have made.

jonhatfield Loc: Green Bay, WI

Or led to a great recession that would have made the 1930s one look small, destruction of free enterprise, and extremes in govt. and politics in effect ending freedeom and self-government.

My oh my, I do so hate all the waste and pay outs, and I'm sure if I or you could go in and check with our common sense we could find all sorts of duplication and waste but since no one checks or some not even read legislation and two people decide anyway, we should just cut all govt. programs to the bone, eliminate social security and medicare since people should be responsible for saving money to begin with. I write letters to my Congressperson and he won't listen and do something. Probably one of the no-readers. Things are so bad, we ought to do away with the govt. I just converted to the Tea Party. As some of us say, Good luck America!

Hi, AuntiE!

OK, this one has to be deleted.

jonhatfield Loc: Green Bay, WI

Is the subject an attempt to understand the politics of the right or a discussion of govt. waste and politics in general? Who or what has gotten the thread off subject?

jonhatfield Loc: Green Bay, WI

Hi again, AuntiE. Oh, and Hi, Tassine.

Coos Bay Tom Loc: coos bay oregon

[The Surfer was paid to make his statements. Check it out it was a scam. Sure there are scammers and they do occasionaly get caught. More oversite is needed but folks wanting to trim government prevent it through lack of funding.quote=AuntiE]The Republicans are offended by the failure of the agency's responsible for payment of food stamps not adequately investigating fraud. Each agency, supposedly, has an investigative division. The best example of a failure to perform their duties was the YouTube Video of a young man from CA admitting he was on food stamps and other social services benefits who was physically able to work. He freely admitted he did not want to and spent his days surfing and such. If even one fourth of the fraudulent recipients were caught, there would be sufficient benefits for those truly in need. The system needs more checks and balances. There have been, unsubstantiated, statements there are individuals who are earning good money and receiving these benefits. They are able to scam the system by working for cash. Every dollar they steal, and it is theft, is less available for those truly in need.

It was Harry Reid in the Senate who would not vote on the three month extension for unemployment benefits.[/quote]

Tasine Loc: Southwest US

~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hi, Jon. This could become a really great thread - if all of us adhere to the specs Glaucon advised. Anyway, I'll be here til I'm not here.

jonhatfield Loc: Green Bay, WI

Questions--what is the meaning of the censure of John McCain for not voting straight line? That is, taking that censure as only a specific attempt to "purge" a "RINO," what is the meaning of the ongoing struggle between "establishment" GOP and the purists on the right? Is it parallel to the dispute between establishment and the Jacksonians in the 1820s? Is the Tea Party parallel to the populists of that era? The Jacksonians and populists ushered in a new partisanship era in American politics and re-set the original disagreement over more or less federal govt. action. One interpretation of the result of this partisan re-set is that one wing of Jacksonian thinking led to the extreme of secession and the Civil War. Might the Tea Party re-set of the right in politics lead to various extremes in action and reaction? For example, if GOP goes straight-line and takes office in states and/or Washington, how far would action go? Or is GOP splits, would that make opening to extreme actions pushed by the further left side of Dems? How unbalanced might politics become? How unbalanced are they already? Answers obviously would be speculative.

slatten49 Loc: Lake Whitney, Texas

I have been reading this thread from the beginning. I must say, I suspect the most startling comment made, yet, on it, I just read: John Hatfield joining the Tea Party?!?

I can feel/hear the rumblings of disbelief, throughout the OPP. Maybe it's just me, but...I am shocked. :shock:

Maybe it is not so far-fetched, as it would appear! :wink:

Glaucon

A researcher named Jost did a summary of the research studies of differences between self labeled liberals and self labeled conservatives conducted over the past thirty years. The studies were in considerable agreement that the groups were different in many ways. The summary is on the internet.

As I read your thoughts, the question comes to mind that if the meaning conservatism and liberalism have changed over the years, how would this affect the research over thirty years?

research done over the past thirty years differences between self labeled liberals and self labeled conservatives