No it is not about a "need to understand economic policy". It is about understanding how stupid liberalism is in every aspect of life...
I hate this story because its pointless. Here I'll make my own, equally pointless story: I would like to ask the dad: Would you like everyone to have a higher GPA? "Yes" he said, "I would like for everybody to do well" Ok here's how to do it. Why not call the dean and ask her to drop Audrey's low GPA even lower by reducing it by one point and boost her daughters already high GPA by one point? Surely that's the fair way to do it? "That's not fair at all!" I slowly smiled, winked and said gently, Welcome to the Democratic party. Taxes are ALWAYS A REDISTRIBUTION. Use you head and THINK
Since you didn't get this the first time I'll try again: How to spot weak arguments "many, all, a lot, every, none, nobody, much, more - Solid arguments use actual numbers with references to their source. These words can indicate implied statistics that show the debater is making up a fact rather than working off real data. Example: âMany Christians disagreeâ
What do you not understand about the concept of a "Capitalist Society"? Are you really that ignorant? Don't even try to attack my knowledge or critical thinking, pal. You have no clue!
Another one I own... (the first was oktiri) "My first Chihuahua who did tricks to amuse me ran away. Yes you can replace him. Now beg, roll over, do a little dance - good doggie!" (Gawd, I hope this one doesn't pee on the floor like the last one did. He does seem to be more of a whiner though...)
See fact and figures are great! Example: on a spending received per household basis the top 20% quintile, at $33,484, is only slightly behind the bottom 20% quintile at $35,510 on total government spending. With the middle 4 quintiles (that's 80% for the slower ones) all receiving much less. taxfoundation
WTF?? We don't need fictional stories like this to define wealth redistribution. We just had one of the greatest redistribuitions of all time from the the taxpayer to the wall street fat cats.
Oh, are you saying that she shouldnt have taxes at all? You don't seem to know the difference between anarcho-capitalism and mixed-capitalism. Guess which one we are?
Whether you lean liberal or conservative overall, don't you think that blanket statements like this are ridiculous? LIBERAL: 1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs. 2. (often initial capital letter) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform. . 3. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, esp. as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties. 5. favoring or permitting freedom of action, esp. with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: The terminology has gotted to the point that anyone who doesn't think the exact same way you do can be called a name. Wow, called a name that actually has decent definition. Is it possible to be a fiscal conservative while being a social liberal? Is it possible to be pro-life, while not wanting abortion to be used as a contraceptive, yet give a raped woman a right to choose? Is it possible to think for ourselves? I could go on and on, but the answers to the above are a resounding yes, yes, and yes. Liberal and NeoCon, give me a break. Why not try to think for yourself and stop beating someone else's drum. I still believe that there are more Americans in the middle 50 percent than on the outside fringes of media generated finger pointing and hatred. I may be wrong, I hope not. c