The Alternative To Obama And Democrat Policies Thread

Posted:
in PoliticalOutsider edited January 2014
State them here, as per discussions in other threads. What are the alternatives? What are the Republican proposals and policies?
«13

Comments

  • jazzgurujazzguru Posts: 6,435member
    Are Republicans the only ones offering alternatives? ARE they offering alternatives?
  • nvidia2008nvidia2008 Posts: 9,262member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post


    Are Republicans the only ones offering alternatives? ARE they offering alternatives?







    As they say, "Well, there's your problem".



    I've given this forum a few days for people to actually post alternatives in this dedicated thread, particularly Obama critics.



    Should we be surprised this thread is still void of Republican alternatives... Or, any alternatives?
  • trumptmantrumptman Posts: 16,271member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post






    As they say, "Well, there's your problem".



    I've given this forum a few days for people to actually post alternatives in this dedicated thread, particularly Obama critics.



    Should we be surprised this thread is still void of Republican alternatives... Or, any alternatives?



    You shouldn't complain. I've been posting intermittently lately because of simple time constraints. Also folks like yourself complain that they basically can't derail a thread or fail to notice the existing threads on the same topic. There are already threads on Rick Perry, Ron Paul and Libertarianism all on the front page here. Pissing and moaning that your catch all thread doesn't generate interest is your problem.



    Flat taxes..

    Health Savings Accounts..

    Fair Trade vs Free Trade..

    Generational Accounting..

    Ending Pax Americana..



    Those are some alternatives right there. I'm quite sure large segments of the Democratic Party and Republican Party would support almost all of them.
  • jazzgurujazzguru Posts: 6,435member
    Numerous alternatives have been offered over multiple threads for several years. They are almost always summarily dismissed by the pro-establishment folks on both sides of the aisle.
  • brbr Posts: 8,255member
    When asked what the poor are supposed to do when charity isn't enough to give them access to food, shelter, and healthcare, those proposing these alleged alternatives either shut up or change the subject.
  • jazzgurujazzguru Posts: 6,435member
    Stealing from others to support them obviously isn't enough, either.
  • kingofsomewherehotkingofsomewherehot Posts: 3,994member
    No politician will offer a truly workable solution, because it's painful.



    The only way for things to get better (longterm) involves pain (short term)... we need to PAY DOWN THE DEBT!!!

    That means cutting spending... cutting EVERYWHERE... military, social welfare, subsidies... EVERYWHERE.



    It will be painful ... especially so for the poorest. Too bad.



    You want to raise taxes??... then raise them on EVERYone... and i'll only support THAT if it includes paying down the debt...

    (Reducing deficit spending is NOT the same as paying down debt.)

    Total spending has to be LESS THAN the income from taxes... period.



    Many people on welfare are going to loose a large portion of their "free money" under this plan ... middle and upper-class are going to see their tax burden increase ... if only due to closing all "loopholes" (though a flat tax, period, would be better.)



    This'll cause the economy to tank again ... it'll take years to catch up ... years of pain and suffering ... but if we can get the spending under control, enact a balanced budget amendment and find a way to turn representatives into actual representatives (instead of full-time campaigners) the nation, and world, would be better for it 10-20 years down the road.



    Nobody will do it, because the pain it causes will cost them re-election. The proles seem to be unable to see past the end of the week, much less able to sacrifice today for a better tomorrow.



    Sorry for the rambling "stream of consciousness" approach, but I don't feel like taking the time to clean it up for you idiots.
  • brbr Posts: 8,255member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post


    Stealing from others to support them obviously isn't enough, either.



    Taxes aren't theft. You have failed to prove this assertion again and again. Even still, stealing to save a life? You wouldn't? So much for the sanctity of human life. Imaginary baby Jesus weeps at you.
  • jazzgurujazzguru Posts: 6,435member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BR View Post


    Taxes aren't theft. You have failed to prove this assertion again and again. Even still, stealing to save a life? You wouldn't? So much for the sanctity of human life. Imaginary baby Jesus weeps at you.



    You say "we're not stealing enough".



    I say stealing is wrong.
  • hands sandonhands sandon Posts: 5,270member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by KingOfSomewhereHot View Post


    No politician will offer a truly workable solution, because it's painful.



    The only way for things to get better (longterm) involves pain (short term)... we need to PAY DOWN THE DEBT!!!

    That means cutting spending... cutting EVERYWHERE... military, social welfare, subsidies... EVERYWHERE.



    It will be painful ... especially so for the poorest. Too bad.



    You want to raise taxes??... then raise them on EVERYone... and i'll only support THAT if it includes paying down the debt...

    (Reducing deficit spending is NOT the same as paying down debt.)

    Total spending has to be LESS THAN the income from taxes... period.



    Many people on welfare are going to loose a large portion of their "free money" under this plan ... middle and upper-class are going to see their tax burden increase ... if only due to closing all "loopholes" (though a flat tax, period, would be better.)



    This'll cause the economy to tank again ... it'll take years to catch up ... years of pain and suffering ... but if we can get the spending under control, enact a balanced budget amendment and find a way to turn representatives into actual representatives (instead of full-time campaigners) the nation, and world, would be better for it 10-20 years down the road.



    Nobody will do it, because the pain it causes will cost them re-election. The proles seem to be unable to see past the end of the week, much less able to sacrifice today for a better tomorrow.



    Sorry for the rambling "stream of consciousness" approach, but I don't feel like taking the time to clean it up for you idiots.



    Yep, reducing the debt will surely require a broad approach.



    Bare in mind though that cutting too far for the poor, can be detrimental financially. Some cuts will mean increase costs in other areas. Take for instance, education, longer term those cuts will will leave more and more people underqualified in society. Cuts in healthcare spending can mean caring for someone because they're symptons got worse instead of having been treated.



    Tax increases, if they're on the table should be higher for the wealthy. When taxes go up for a typical American, they pay aproximately the same as the increase. When they go up for a wealthy person, they prepare accordingly and pay only say 30% of the increase. That's why taxes must be raised higher on the rich than the typical American. Like I posted recently, a janitor in a fancy New York skyscrapper pays 25% of his or her income in taxes, the well to do in that same building only pay 15% of theirs.



    Cutting tax loopholes is a good thing, but can only go so far and sometimes for good reason.
  • hands sandonhands sandon Posts: 5,270member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post


    You say "we're not stealing enough".



    I say stealing is wrong.



    I know you don't think it's stealing when it's say military spending or enforcing the rule of law. So should the wealthy pay any more than the averagely wealthy American in taxes if it was a completely constitutional ideal set of taxes that were being payed?
  • jazzgurujazzguru Posts: 6,435member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post


    I know you don't think it's stealing when it's say military spending or enforcing the rule of law. So should the wealthy pay any more than the averagely wealthy American in taxes if it was a completely constitutional ideal set of taxes that were being payed?



    Taxation is theft. Period. I don't care what the money is used for, it's still theft.
  • kingofsomewherehotkingofsomewherehot Posts: 3,994member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post


    Taxation is theft. Period. I don't care what the money is used for, it's still theft.



    Oh come on!

    So you're an anarchist?... You don't think we should have any government here in the USA?



    It costs money to provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and to secure the blessings of liberty for ourselves and our posterity. (Though today's government sure doesn't seem to be taking our "posterity" into account when they make decisions.)

    Government doesn't come free... Defense, infrastructure, et al... It costs $.

    The Constitution of the USA allows for taxation. The FORM of taxation has been questioned from time to time, but not the fact that some taxation is legal and necessary. (And therefore not theft.)
  • noahjnoahj Posts: 4,500member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by KingOfSomewhereHot View Post


    Oh come on!

    So you're an anarchist?... You don't think we should have any government here in the USA?



    It costs money to provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and to secure the blessings of liberty for ourselves and our posterity. (Though today's government sure doesn't seem to be taking our "posterity" into account when they make decisions.)

    Government doesn't come free... Defense, infrastructure, et al... It costs $.

    The Constitution of the USA allows for taxation. The FORM of taxation has been questioned from time to time, but not the fact that some taxation is legal and necessary. (And therefore not theft.)



    I am going to agree with this overall.
  • jazzgurujazzguru Posts: 6,435member
    Lysander Spooner wrote:



    Quote:

    It is true that the theory of our Constitution is, that all taxes are paid voluntarily; that our government is a mutual insurance company, voluntarily entered into by the people with each other . . . .



    But this theory of our government is wholly different from the practical fact. The fact is that the government, like a highwayman, say to a man: "Your money, or your life." And many, if not most, taxes are paid under the compulsion of that threat.



    The government does not, indeed, waylay a man in a lonely place, spring upon him from the roadside, and holding a pistol to his head, proceed to rifle his pockets. But the robbery is none the less a robbery on that account; and it is far more dastardly and shameful.



    The highwayman takes solely upon himself the responsibility, danger, and crime of his own act. He does not pretend that he has any rightful claim to your money, or that he intends to use it for your own benefit. He does not pretend to be anything but a robber. He has not acquired impudence enough to profess to be merely a "protector," and that he takes men's money against their will, merely to enable him to "protect" those infatuated travellers, who feel perfectly able to protect themselves, or do not appreciate his peculiar system of protection. He is too sensible a man to make such professions as these. Furthermore, having taken your money, he leaves you, as you wish him to do. He does not persist in following you on the road, against your will; assuming to be your rightful "sovereign," on account of the "protection" he affords you. He does not keep "protecting" you, by commanding you to bow down and serve him; by requiring you to do this, and forbidding you to do that; by robbing you of more money as often as he finds it for his interest or pleasure to do so; and by branding you as a rebel, a traitor, and an enemy to your country, and shooting you down without mercy, if you dispute his authority, or resist his demands. He is too much of a gentleman to be guilty of such impostures, and insults, and villainies as these. In short, he does not, in addition to robbing you, attempt to make you either his dupe or his slave.



  • noahjnoahj Posts: 4,500member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post


    Lysander Spooner wrote:



    I understand the sentiment, and a great deal of taxation falls under what you are describing, but not all taxation. The problem is, the line has become very blurred now and there are those that literally believe that it will mean death to them if you cut off those taxes.



    What taxes are acceptable? What taxes are not? Even if it is done with high minded ideals and intentions, if something is wrong it is wrong.
  • hands sandonhands sandon Posts: 5,270member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by NoahJ View Post


    I understand the sentiment, and a great deal of taxation falls under what you are describing, but not all taxation. The problem is, the line has become very blurred now and there are those that literally believe that it will mean death to them if you cut off those taxes.



    What taxes are acceptable? What taxes are not? Even if it is done with high minded ideals and intentions, if something is wrong it is wrong.



    If it's so wrong he should stop paying taxes, otherwise he's just paying to further empower a tyrant who will feed off of others even more. But he won't stop because he's too scared to stand and fight the evil. Better to pay the mafia huh?
  • nvidia2008nvidia2008 Posts: 9,262member
    OK, now we're getting somewhere.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by KingOfSomewhereHot View Post


    No politician will offer a truly workable solution, because it's painful.



    The only way for things to get better (longterm) involves pain (short term)... we need to PAY DOWN THE DEBT!!!

    That means cutting spending... cutting EVERYWHERE... military, social welfare, subsidies... EVERYWHERE.



    It will be painful ... especially so for the poorest. Too bad.



    You want to raise taxes??... then raise them on EVERYone... and i'll only support THAT if it includes paying down the debt...

    (Reducing deficit spending is NOT the same as paying down debt.)

    Total spending has to be LESS THAN the income from taxes... period.



    Many people on welfare are going to loose a large portion of their "free money" under this plan ... middle and upper-class are going to see their tax burden increase ... if only due to closing all "loopholes" (though a flat tax, period, would be better.)



    This'll cause the economy to tank again ... it'll take years to catch up ... years of pain and suffering ... but if we can get the spending under control, enact a balanced budget amendment and find a way to turn representatives into actual representatives (instead of full-time campaigners) the nation, and world, would be better for it 10-20 years down the road.



    Nobody will do it, because the pain it causes will cost them re-election. The proles seem to be unable to see past the end of the week, much less able to sacrifice today for a better tomorrow.



    Sorry for the rambling "stream of consciousness" approach, but I don't feel like taking the time to clean it up for you idiots.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by trumptman View Post


    You shouldn't complain. I've been posting intermittently lately because of simple time constraints. Also folks like yourself complain that they basically can't derail a thread or fail to notice the existing threads on the same topic. There are already threads on Rick Perry, Ron Paul and Libertarianism all on the front page here. Pissing and moaning that your catch all thread doesn't generate interest is your problem.



    Flat taxes..

    Health Savings Accounts..

    Fair Trade vs Free Trade..

    Generational Accounting..

    Ending Pax Americana..



    Those are some alternatives right there. I'm quite sure large segments of the Democratic Party and Republican Party would support almost all of them.



  • noahjnoahj Posts: 4,500member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Hands Sandon View Post


    If it's so wrong he should stop paying taxes, otherwise he's just paying to further empower a tyrant who will feed off of others even more. But he won't stop because he's too scared to stand and fight the evil. Better to pay the mafia huh?



    You would love for him to end up in prison wouldn't you?
  • kingofsomewherehotkingofsomewherehot Posts: 3,994member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post


    Lysander Spooner wrote:



    So, Jazz...



    How are we (as a nation) to pay for our defense? ... how will highways get built... how will we build and maintain a closed sewer system and water-treatment systems for large cities? How will the court system be funded? (In the event that someone wrongs you, that might come in handy!)



    You've plainly stated that ALL TAXATION IS THEFT ... well, theft should not be tolerated, so taxation should not exist...

    HOW DO YOU PROPOSE WE PAY FOR THE CONSTITUTIONALLY MANDATED GOVERNMENT? (I'll readily concede that our government has far overstepped it's mandate, but we still need to fund SOME sort of government.)





    Again, MY recommendation is a flat tax ... equally applied to EVERYONE. With no exceptions, loopholes, exemptions, etc... just pay your damn taxes!

    (Income is one way to do it... but we'd need to clearly define income (I'd think capital gains should be considered income.) Sales tax is another way... but if you exempt food... should it extend to stupid (but tastey!) food like pork rinds and canned soda?... because a sales tax on rice and beans just doesn't seem right.)

    Or a combination of the two (and perhaps others.)

    My recommendation also comes with an immediate requirement for a balanced budget ... absolutely NO spending over income without an act of congress. (Clearly defined conditions like a declaration of war might be required to even consider it.)

    It'll be painful... for several years... but would be worth the pain and suffering for the wealth that would be made available to the next generation of Americans.
Sign In or Register to comment.