{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
1/17/2013 9:44:38 PM
23
When will the GOP realize they need to not be the party against civil rights, women, and minorities in order to stay relevant?
English
-
When they don't need to be a party against civil rights, women and minorities in order to stay relevant.
-
This statement you posted shows why most people shouldnt be allowed to vote
-
I like how democrats always throw around the discrimination card when our party does nothing of the sort.
-
Yes, because it is Democrats who say things like "vaginas are able to repel -blam!- sperm"...
-
So you're going to judge the entire party from one man's statement? Lets not forget the democrats logic of taxing the rich to fix economic issues or using diplomacy with a terrorist group and hostile country.
-
lol, we shouldn't tax the rich? Are you high?
-
Well if the Republicans strategy of giving them massive tax cuts isn't working, try the opposite and taxing hem a bit more. And don't forget other republicans who give off such statements like "A lack of religion causes school shooting" and funnily enough, in the '08 election this person was the third most popular choice for republican presidential candidate.
-
We tried taxing more and it has never worked. Never.
-
No. The wealthy are responsible for keeping certain jobs in demand. They basically created a market for luxury goods so the commoners could have a job. Take away the money of the people who actually [u]spend[/u] in the economy and you'll see some problems. How about the Democrats actually look into solving the root issues instead of taking from the rich and giving to the poor.
-
lol, seriously? We shouldn't tax the rich because they spend money on luxury goods? Hahaha, oh wow.
-
Edited by Quantum: 1/18/2013 1:29:00 AMHaha, this is plain nonsense. Luxury spending has absolutely nothing to do with job creation, aside from say yacht manufacturers. Laissez fair failed in 1929, it failed in 2007, and it's still failing now.
-
You clearly have no understanding of economic demand.
-
Son, demand is driven by consumer taste, not luxury spending from high income earners. Austrian Economics needs to die.
-
And the wealthy are consumers. What's hard about this? If they want something, that subsequentry creates a demand for it.
-
[quote]And the wealthy are consumers. What's hard about this? If they want something, that subsequentry creates a demand for it.[/quote] You act as if they won't have enough money to buy those luxury goods... As well as pay off all our debt, and buy themselves a new car, and house, and pay my college funds, all in one day. Yea, there gonna have more taxes, but they make so much money it is not going to matter anyway.
-
Edited by Quantum: 1/18/2013 2:35:33 AMThat's completely irrelevant to the vast majority of consumer [b]demand. [/b] Luxury spending is not a good indicator.
-
It was just an example. That doesn't even include the over taxation of businesses that for some reason people think is a good idea.
-
That's a different issue. It would be more preferable to tax their personal incomes rather than their business income.
-
Ah, the "trickle effect" which the Republicans have been using for a while now. So why hasn't it worked?
-
You forgot science in your list.
-
Proven wrong.
-
Ah, right. That too. That's why I liked Huntsman in the GOP primaries. He was "tired of the Republican party being the "anti-science" party" [or something along those lines]
-
I saw that, it's almost like he's on the wrong side.
