Let me remind conservatives that one big reason that they lost the e******n is because of their insistence on maligning those who are to some degree dependent on government services, while at the same time calling for cuts to those services. They cling to the rhetoric of “makers” and the “takers” the latter of course being anyone who ever needed some help getting by. They call people who are just trying to survive in a cruel economic environment leaches and parasites. They believe, or pretend to believe that anyone can go out and get job- a job that pays a living wage anytime they wish if only they were not so lazy and content to be on the dole. They continue to complain that 47% of people pay no federal income tax but fail to acknowledge that the majority are working but too poor to have an income tax liability, in part due to the earned income tax credit and child care credit supported by Republicans. They also fail to acknowledge that these same people pay other federal taxes, as well as state and local taxes which are highly regressive.

This harsh swim or sink attitude emanates from the same people who expound a steadfast belief in lais-sez faire capitalism, and minimum regulations and safeguards against corporate excesses. They are often anti union and opposed to raising the minimum wage. What they fail to understand or acknowledge is that poverty, unemployment, and underemployment are built into the capitalist system. Even in a regulated economy, the need for labor expands and contracts as the result of a multitude of factors at home and around the world. When the economy shrinks, excess workers are sidelined. Is it possible for these former employees to enter into capital enterprises of their own? At the same time, the workforce expands and contracts, also as the result of factors that we can’t control. There is also the issue of matching sk**ls to the available jobs geographically. Rarely is there a perfect match between those seeking jobs and the needs of business , and there is usually excess labor.

In addition they fail to grasp the fact that not only does a free market necessitate a government assistance Why government assistance? on occasion, but the social safety nets are good for capitalism. When the economy shrinks as it always will from time to time, programs are needed to maintain societal stability and a workforce that will be to be ready to work when the system needs there services again-to work for and enrich the capitalists. In their book “Regulating the Poor: The Function of Public Welfare”, Francis Fox Piven and Richard A. Cloward make this argument, and go on to say that relief efforts not only maintain social order, but also reinforce the work ethic by ensuring that people are only given enough to subsist without being to comfortable.
I will submit to you that the only way to eliminate the much maligned dependency is to regulate business to the extent where they must put people before profits and provide a good job for all regardless of the bottom line. However that would be SOCIALISM and we can’t have that. Or, we could re-establish alms houses. What we cannot do is to have it both ways. We must either accept tighter controls on business practices to prevent the exploitation of workers in the name of profit, or stop persecuting the less fortunate victims of the unsavory side effects of free enterprise .

To trot out a reason as a big reason is very different from it being a true reason. Religion is a big reason why a Mormon wasn't elected. Evangelicals didn't v**e. {Religion was part of the reason. He was not elected because he's an out of touch plutocrat, and wrong on every issue, and not even honest about what he believes}

Did you v**e for Obama, because you h**e Mormons? {stupid question}

Mormons help the poor victims of free enterprise and you h**e them, because they are not the government. And they oppose marriage redefinition.

Let me remind conservatives that one big reason that they lost the e******n is because of their insistence on maligning those who are to some degree dependent on government services, while at the same time calling for cuts to those services. They cling to the rhetoric of “makers” and the “takers” the latter of course being anyone who ever needed some help getting by. They call people who are just trying to survive in a cruel economic environment leaches and parasites. They believe, or pretend to believe that anyone can go out and get job- a job that pays a living wage anytime they wish if only they were not so lazy and content to be on the dole. They continue to complain that 47% of people pay no federal income tax but fail to acknowledge that the majority are working but too poor to have an income tax liability, in part due to the earned income tax credit and child care credit supported by Republicans. They also fail to acknowledge that these same people pay other federal taxes, as well as state and local taxes which are highly regressive.

This harsh swim or sink attitude emanates from the same people who expound a steadfast belief in lais-sez faire capitalism, and minimum regulations and safeguards against corporate excesses. They are often anti union and opposed to raising the minimum wage. What they fail to understand or acknowledge is that poverty, unemployment, and underemployment are built into the capitalist system. Even in a regulated economy, the need for labor expands and contracts as the result of a multitude of factors at home and around the world. When the economy shrinks, excess workers are sidelined. At the same time, the workforce expands and contracts, also as the result of factors that we can’t control. There is also the issue of matching sk**ls to the available jobs geographically. Rarely is there a perfect match between those seeking jobs and the needs of business , and there is usually excess labor.

In addition they fail to grasp the fact that not only does a free market necessitate a government assistance on occasion, but the social safety nets are good for capitalism. When the economy shrinks as it always will from time to time, programs are needed to maintain societal stability and a workforce that will be to be ready to work when the system needs there services again-to work for and enrich the capitalists. In their book “Regulating the Poor: The Function of Public Welfare”, Francis Fox Piven and Richard A. Cloward make this argument, and go on to say that relief efforts not only maintain social order, but also reinforce the work ethic by ensuring that people are only given enough to subsist without being to comfortable.
I will submit to you that the only way to eliminate the much maligned dependency is to regulate business to the extent where they must put people before profits and provide a good job for all regardless of the bottom line. However that would be SOCIALISM and we can’t have that. Or, we could re-establish alms houses. What we cannot do is to have it both ways. We must either accept tighter controls on business practices to prevent the exploitation of workers in the name of profit, or stop persecuting the less fortunate victims of the unsavory side effects of free enterprise .