Ignorance like oh, say, a government in debt by trillions of dollars? Ignorance that will force our children to pay 60% income taxes at $200,000? THAT kind of ignorance?
Most people seemed to support the "War on TERROR", which has caused the debt to grow by a considerable amount, with little benefit to the U.S. Yet, now that the government is trying to do things that will actually help your country, it is not getting enough support.
That is really sad. It is somewhat understandable why many people would be in support of a war to keep them safe, considering that 9/11 "conveniently" occurred at the beginning of Bush's administration so that the propaganda could begin to convince people that TERRORISTS are after them.
However, it seems like most of the time when the government wants to do things that will help the country, people are mostly against it. They either claim that their rights are being taken away, their taxes will be increased, it will add to the deficit or even worse, it is form of SOCIALISM. Of course we all know that social democracy is a horrible thing that will force everyone to pay more TAXES (gasp!), with the only possible benefits being better healthcare, education, transportation, child care, social services, social security, consumer protection, environmental protection, social justice, labor rights, human rights, social rights, civil rights, civil liberties, etc.
Too many Americans are against taxes, so lawmakers do not have enough support to raise taxes in order to improve the U.S. or even pay off the deficit, yet Americans still want better healthcare, education, transportation, etc. It really does not work like that. You have to give more to receive more.
That is interesting that you say that your children would have to pay more taxes. What about you? It seems like many Americans complain about how their children are going to have to pay more taxes, yet they seem unwilling to pay more taxes themselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by .Ethiell
In all honesty i think this bill is a pretty good decision, sure it will put some pressure on everyone financially but so does every major reform. I'd rather go through a tough spot now and fix the issue rather regret it thoroughly in my lifetime or have my children/grandchildren be punished for our ignorance.
There should be more Americans that think that way.
__________________
"Against logic there is no armor like ignorance." - Laurence J. Peter
There really is no rush to abandon oil very soon. However, waiting on switching to alternative energy sources until the oil is depleted, or even near close to depleted is nonsense. What effect do you think it will have on the economy and infrastructure when oil prices increase ten-fold or more?
Alternative energy sources need to be implemented before oil prices increase to an unbearable point. That does not mean within a decade or two, but that also does not mean shortly before all of the oil supply is gone.
I am in no way proposing to not search and switch to alternative energy. However, what I propose is doing it very slowly, and as the economy is able to support the new alternative energy sources, increase the speed of economic diversification. In essence, do what you have proposed.
When has the debt of the United States been worse than it is now? In light of the fact that inflation is only going to continue to skyrocket due to Government (both Republicrats and Demicans) printing money, causing a rapid devaluation of the currency.
If you had listened to mainstream conservative voices during the Bush admin, they were LIVID with how much he was spending. Big government is big government, regardless if it's painted Red or Blue.
We don't need no education!
We don't need no thought control,
No dark sarcasm in the classroom!
Teachers leave them kids alone,
Hey! Teachers! Leave them kids alone!
All in all it's just another brick in the wall.
All in all you're just another brick in the wall.
If you had listened to mainstream conservative voices during the Bush admin, they were LIVID with how much he was spending. Big government is big government, regardless if it's painted Red or Blue.
I was not talking about mainstream conservatives. I was talking about the American people. Also, big government is not necessarily a bad thing. Big government is bad if it is poorly implemented. Big government is good if every part of it is there for the purpose of improving the lives of its citizens.
__________________
"Against logic there is no armor like ignorance." - Laurence J. Peter
We don't need no education!
We don't need no thought control,
No dark sarcasm in the classroom!
Teachers leave them kids alone,
Hey! Teachers! Leave them kids alone!
All in all it's just another brick in the wall.
All in all you're just another brick in the wall.
Yes, his approval ratings gradually declined, but if they did not like his spending in Afghanistan, why did his approval ratings go up when he send troops to Iraq? The last time I checked, war results in spending money.
__________________
"Against logic there is no armor like ignorance." - Laurence J. Peter
When has the debt of the United States been worse than it is now? In light of the fact that inflation is only going to continue to skyrocket due to Government (both Republicrats and Demicans) printing money, causing a rapid devaluation of the currency.
I meant debt as a percentage of GDP, which is the real issue. In that sense, it was much worse going into the 50's.
__________________
Better contraceptives will control population only if people will use them. A nuclear holocaust can be prevented only if the conditions under which nations make war can be changed. The environment will continue to deteriorate until pollution practices are abandoned. We need to make vast changes in human behavior. B.F. Skinner
tech.freak you obviously haven't done any research at all. experts have reviewed Obama's first 6 months in office, and stated he is already on his way to being the next FDR. its idiots like you that would've put john McCain in the white house, whom experts agree would have screwed America within the first THREE months in office. Obama has already started repairing our economy, education, environment, and health care - scoring an average B+ in all four for his first six months - so the next time you're gonna try to make a point, make it a good one. and back it up with evidence.
read this while you're at it; its obvious you're one of those right-wing whackos
According to eminent scholars and historians,..LIBERAL leaders are far superior to con "leaders".
Sorry cons.. Liberal FDR is ranked #1 in the 20th century, NOT Ronnie RayGun.
TOP 5 are ALL Liberals. - yes even Lincoln, he was in fact a liberal.
on a final note: thank god most of America isn't as stupid as you.
and you also claim that global worming doesn't exist?! are freaking retarded?! its basically been proven: the polar ice caps are melting, the temperatures are rising all over the globe, and weather patterns are off the charts. are you also going to claim that evolution doesn't exist?
__________________
Add me on the Zune Social. Search for PickleAndCheese. Also, my Zune games/apps Archive!
-Zune Social
-Zune Boards
-Zunegg
-Zunited
Last edited by ConnerWoods; 09-06-2009 at 09:53 PM.
In my book, the Best Presidents of the 20th Century are:
Theodore Roosevelt, Progressive Republican
Conservation, construction, and monopoly fighting, in turn created the middle class from a country that was clearly in the back-pocket of the Vanderbilt, Rockefeller, et cetera. He was a muckraker who believed that U.S. Foreign policy should involve speaking softly, and carrying a big stick (Require explanation?). Also, he believed in individual rights, but work towards a individual society, legislation was fine, but it should not be used to reconstruct society.
Harry S. Truman, Conservative Democrat
Took the initiative to end World War II but making the tough call of using nuclear weapons, instead of an island invasion that would have probably resulted in genocide. Then turned around, and had the U.S. rebuild Japan, and Germany with modern industrial technology that granted a boon to the two, and would ensure that their economies would recover.
Dwight D. Eisenhower, Conservative-Progressive Republican
Interstate highways, ending of segregation, national security, and aiding Korea in their fight against the Korean communists, and Chinese Army. After getting advice from his advisor did not have the U.S. support the French in a little country called, Vietnam.
The biggest industrial, and economic boom took place under Truman, and Eisenhower. Not Franklin D. Roosevelt.
In my book, the Worst Presidents of the 20th Century are:
Woodrow Wilson, Liberal Democrat
Started the trend of curtailing First Amendment rights during a time of war. Founded the League of Nations. White supremacist and slavery apologist (i.e. slavery was good). Promoted segregation in the Government, and in the U.S. Founded a U.S. Gestapo-type organization of 250,000 members in 60 cities who conducted ILLEGAL search, and seizures.
Franklin D. Roosevelt, Socialist-Communist Democrat
Employed same tactics as Woodrow Wilson when it came to First Amendment rights during a time of war. Was elected to four consecutive terms, even knowing that the tradition (unspoken law) was two terms. Created new deal programs that only worsened the economic situation by prolonging it, instead of letting it run its course whereby it would have only lasted half as long. Created Fannie Mae (need more be typed). Created the Federal Reserve, which has been the source of more harm than good (look at current rate of inflation). Removed US Currency from being Gold backed to just printed paper (perceived value). Quite a bit more, but the gist of it is typed. If people are following FDR's role, beware.
Jimmy Carter, Liberal Democrat
Giving away the Panama Canal, instead of working out a deal that would ensure both countries prospered from the canal. It was built by U.S. with U.S. lives, work, and more. Handling of the Iran Hostage Crisis. Energy Crisis, and not allowing for natural resources to tapped. The shaky documents known as the Camp David Accords.
FDR wasn't as great as he was cracked up to be. What really saved the economy/nation was World War II. All FDR did was create jobs that would only last for a short time. He did nothing that would benefit the country in the long run. Luckily, WWII brought a large amount of wealth our way (it caused an industrial boom and whatnot).
EDIT: I just read Gow's post on FDR, and everything he said is 100% proven fact. FDR is NOT the way to go.
And last time I checked, Global Warming was pretty much disproven. Al Gore's book was supposed to be a huge proof on why it was real, but half of the facts are either outdated or were discredited.
There are so many ways a company could easily switch to more renewable resources that there's no excuse anymore. It's sad that the government would have to force them, but that's the way of capitalism. It's expensive to change how things are done. But saying that this is a bad thing is like saying that child labor laws were a bad idea too.
Reform is a good thing, and no one will disagree about this in 50-100 years when they get their electricity from non-fossil fuels.
__________________
If only you could see... it can't be taught, only learned.
Franklin D. Roosevelt did not found the Federal Reserve, Woodrow Wilson was the signer of the act that created it. However, there were several amendments to the Act under FDR.
Is the Federal Reserve worth the hassle in the end?
Franklin D. Roosevelt did not found the Federal Reserve, Woodrow Wilson was the signer of the act that created it. However, there were several amendments to the Act under FDR.
Is the Federal Reserve worth the hassle in the end?
They might not have realized back then that having the entire country's monetary system controlled by private banks is a bad thing, but it seems obvious now.
__________________
"Against logic there is no armor like ignorance." - Laurence J. Peter
