the funny thing about this video is that statistically republicans donate more to charity than democrats do and bill forgets to mention how not only clinton but clinton and bush came together to help haiti after the earthquake. Also democrats want to help poor by forcing people to give their money to the poor so they can continue sitting around doing nothing whereas republicans want to help the poor get jobs.
@xPSYKOxLIBBYx Listen to me PSYKO. I think you a good person who is not narrow. There is definitely a lot people doing a lot of good in our nation. We only hear what the news reports. Our ADRA was present at Hurricane Katrina working with the Red Cross. We weren't on the news and that's OK with us we just want to help. I'm only sharing this with you because I trust you're a good person and can see good in other areas in your life. Take care my friend.
@xPSYKOxLIBBYx Well my friend I certainly can't refute what you have seen. If indeed there are any churches that don't give to the poor then that would be a tragedy for sure. I can speak for my church. ******** Denomination has many organisations within it's self: SAWS, ADRA, MARANATHA BUILDERS, COMMUNITY SERVICES. These distribute food,clothing,ed materials, meds and build hosp.,schools, houses, churches and water systems-world wide. We're Conser.,we care & we're not the only church who does.
Oh yes!! I'm a "moron" and "Democrats care more than Republicans" LOLOLOL Stop it your "killing" me HAHAHAHA!!!! Have a nice day you "caring" person you. :-)
Very true. While it's true there are good and bad on both sides of the political spectrum, it seems more consistently true that Democrats just seem innately more compassionate.
The phrase (nee: oxymoron) 'compassionate conservative' had to be coined by Bush because it was so alien to the party's core values that it needed to be coined.
Socialism always fails. It has in the past and it will in the future, as sure as the sun will rise in the morning. All that needs to be said is, look at the state of the USA with it's debts and when it fails from the burden of hand out programs like Medicare that make the liberals feel good, then see just how much suffering there will be. It is much better to teach someone to fish than to give them food for a day.
@questioneverything2 what has failed is the trickle down myth, if it was true we would be in great shape so it must be another right wing moron belief.
@jaxsdas56 Trickle down has made the wealthiest poor people in the world. The 80's & 90's were the most prosperous economies ever. The liberals like Obama just want to give everything away. Like no down payment home purchases for the poor paying only on the interest of that loan, that will adjust upward in 5 years, that causes the poor to hurt even more when they loose their home. All for what? just so a bleeding heart liberal can feel good for what they have done giving a loan to the poor.
This has got to be the funniest clip I have ever listened to on youtube.LOL I'm glad I'm NOT a Democrat, from this clip it sounds like it would be embarrassing!! LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.....oh stop it hahaha...I can't take it anymore HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!
frankly in name Ron Paul the rich grasp on the party has taken the principles away
Democrats need the IRS AND STATE INCOME TAX we need to abolish the income tax and allow SSA to be voluntary at any time this is proportionate to the freedom and liberty of all citizen
the best way to help poor people is to stop inflation. Unskilled workers are the least likely to receive large pay raises, but are hit equally by inflation. Between 2000 and now, the dollar lost 20% of its value. That means the poor are 20% poorer.
So Democrats care more because they take other people's money to give to other people. How is it "selfish" to ban people working for less than $X? How is throwing people who can't earn that much out of a job somehow selfless? How is giving to the richest age group by stealing from the poorest not "selfish"?
Im neither but Obama is a democrat and he obviously cares about the economy and the american people and that is why the economy is booming right now...People are people and it doesn't matter what party your for.
not ONE republican will watch this......... period. Therefore. This video is unfortunately not relevant to anyone other that the people who already agree with what it is saying. sorry but that's the truth
as for increasing regulation of the GSEs, which would have severely softened the subprime collapse... It's hard to find the letters, but several Democrats actually discouraged Bush from doing it. And this is coming from a guy who HATES Bush for getting us into these nonsensical blood money wars.
Google "Pelosi Visa IPO Stock" to see how Nanci Pelosi, as speaker, made a killing off Visa IPO stock that *would have been adversely affected by legislation she did not let come to a vote*.
Google "mean worker wages" and "Long Term U.S. Inflation" for my wages and inflation statistics.
Google "federal reserve secret bailout" to discover something FAR WORSE than TARP that was done completely in secret even from Congress.
another thing democrats do is help illegal immigrants get social security cards so they can vote, maybe you should look more toward finding the problems with both sides instead of being a one sided prick
We'll wake up one day and tel our children's children how we used to have 45 million Americans die due to lack of health care. We used to ban gay marriage and legislate religious bigotry. Much the same as we hear now the horror stories of the Great Depression which came after 3 Republican administrations in a row.
@nfries88 dems have done just as much to concentrate wealth? Which Dem signed TARP? Which Republican gave us Social Security, or Medicare? There's a difference. Republicans are corporate lobbyists. Period.
@sinistar99 which Dem voted against TARP? Which Dem wanted to restrain the GSEs to prevent the market collapse that allowed for TARP? Which Dem wants to supervise the Federal Reserve, which is at the heart of that issue in the first place? Which Dem wants to end the Federal Reserve, which has through inflationary policy concentrated wealth in the hands of the Wall St fat-cats?
Dennis Kucinich is the only Dem that fits all of those basic requirements of truly giving a damn about *US*.
Republicans aren't alone. It's both parties! Almost all of them are in on the scam! They all sat back and let the Federal Reserve induce 2000% inflation over a century, while wages only went up 500%. Republican and Democrat made no difference in the matter. So where did that 1500% of wealth wind up? Overwhelmingly in Wall St, Defense contractors, and our very own Representatives! Get the picture!
@sinistar99 nevermind that Obama received more campaign donations from Wall St than any other presidential campaign in history (look it up) and appointed Tim Geithner, a Wall St crony, to Secretary of the Treasury!
@KellyAnnOR no worries, it's just that I tend to go ballistic whenever I see a channel like that, proudly exposing the lies and spins of the ''other side'', while nodding at any lie their team puts forward.
@KellyAnnOR You are correct about the Libertarian philosophy (the right) which wants to dismatle regulatory agencies and would urge citizens to use the courts for redress......BUT, the people who control the right want all this TORT reform so that basically citizens would have NO redress at all. We would just be fucked! How does that make sense??
We should be asking Ron Paul supporters what they think of TORT reform???
@KellyAnnOR Could please you elaborate on what radical changes Ron Paul wants to make that would be bad for the environment and the lower/middle class?
@KellyAnnOR I never said that, what you seem to ignore is it's a scheme, in some of the most socialist places like QC, social security is funded through heavy taxation to the point where welfare recipients should have around 100k a year, obviously they only get a minuscule fraction, so where does the money go? Your assumptions about me are based on ignorance and bigotry, you're just a retarded and uneducated who wants big government to take them by the hand, leftist wacko..
@KellyAnnOR It only looks severe because you don't know how politically motivated these rotten institutions are, but you probably just don't know any better
@KellyAnnOR Way to use examples and pick them apart to where they,re completely out of context.. I never said conditions back then were good, but the financial system allowed for people to immigrate here and make a life for themselves, what the left doesn't seem to get is that no matter how well intentioned government is, they're going to waste your money, as for your ridiculous example, how about insurance you half-wit leftist wacko? I won't debate you if you use red herrings
@KellyAnnOR It would be a giant leap in the right direction. I would like to see our spending under control before we decide on the tax issue. I don't exactly agree with everything he says, but I think it is worth looking into. Everyone is entitled to their opinions =)
@KellyAnnOR I still believe we could solve the problem without raising taxes for anyone, and make living affordable without depending on the wealthy. I don't really agree with tax cuts for the rich same with bailouts, the whole "trickle-down" concept doesn't really work.
@KellyAnnOR why is the US unemployment rate at 1920's level? If your claim that government provided all these improvements by itself, where are the jobs that could be occupied by the 'poor' people, that's the problem of the lefties, they think of poors as a static class, with no ability whatsoever to make a living for themselves, so they accept the idea of being robbed by government programs that do little to nothing to raise the poors up, also you only look at the upside -->
of these programs, while overlooking the government debt, heavy taxation, and regulatory control that it implies, what's going to happen to the poor when the heavy government apparatus that provided them for years starts to fail? you'll have MUCH worse working conditions under such conditions that you would have in the 20's
@KellyAnnOR here's an even better question, why did the US industrial revolution produce so much wealth/opportunities for individuals who came from all over the world, it hardly would of made sense for immigrants to come to this country if the situation was qualitatively worse than elsewhere, that's not to discount the injustices that were made, but the claim that gov-backed workers unions are the reason why conditions improved is fallacious, again, there's a huge difference between-
..allowing workers to form associations to possibly improve their conditions or set up insurance programs of sorts, and enforcing these unions via government to where they have monopoly on the employer-ee contract, that's my issue with these government regulations, I'm not saying unions didn't do any good, in fact I am for unions, just not in the autocratic form they exist today.
@KellyAnnOR that's not going to happen, since nobody would accept such an underpay considering the diminished purchasing power, and what if they're offered a job that's a dollar under the imposed minimum and they *decide to take it up and maybe work their way up and then if their skills and efforts are good enough they might wind up getting paid more than the imposed minimum in the end, if the labor thinks it's value is greater than his job will give him he ought to find another one.
@KellyAnnOR I was under the assumption that we were talking about average americans, not billionaires. I think people should have the right to the money that they rightfully earn. I think it would be unfair to charge them more for the same goods and services because they are wealthy. If I go to a grocery store; should they charge me based on my salary? I think the real issue is, why are taxes so expensive and why so many can't afford to pay them.
@KellyAnnOR Is it not selfish to demand someone else for their money? Is it logical waist that money on inept government programs? Where I live their are many republicans and libertarians that donate to charities, but we would rather give our money to privately run charities and organizations so that they can more effectively use it. Most politicians, whether they are republican or democrat, are corrupt.
minimum wage doesn't do anywhere near as much for the poor than you try to paint it, I'm afraid you're just another left shill, no better than the crazy demagogs on Fox..
I agree with a lot of these points and find myself leaning to the more democratic side when it comes to social issues. Mostly, I consider myself a moderate, but yet I want to vote for Republican candidate Ron Paul....sigh* politics can be pretty confusing sometimes.
@blueberryxmuffins The point is its not your job or governments job to tell me who to care for,my family and friends are people to and my resources are mine to give to who i choose....taxing me to the point where it is hard to care for them or myself to satisfy you and what you think my resources should be used for is a form of tyranny....someone has said " when you use force to do good you get evil"
You've introduced some serious equivocation here. Neoconservatism, what you equate with the Republican Party, does rationalize capitalism with some sense of rugged individualism. As a small-L Republican (and there are far more than you may assume) and someone working on his PhD in economics, my opposition--like many others--had everything to do with compassion. Rationing any good has never produced results for the most marginalized in society...
. viewer- you said that democrats are responsible helping women and minorities get equal rights, well your right, i.e. Kennedy. Historically republicans have been more on the side of freedom. It doesnt necessarily mean that they care for the individuals but they care about american freedom. The main opposition to the civil rights bill were democrats. The same as in the 1860's Democrats apposed civil rights while radical republicans fought for them.. i.e. Lincoln
@mrmrhodes , let us be reminded the Republican Party TODAY are not comprise of people like Abraham Lincoln. They are DEAD. The Republican Party TODAY is not the same party during Lincoln's time.
liberalviewer works for the Democratic administration, which is why he can not use his name..never heed the advice or proposal from a hidden coward..Democratic Party Officials founded the KuKlux Klan, how helpful and caring was that......
@Deb4Illinois Its also a well known fact that the Ku Klux Klan originated from White supremicists in the South that flipped from being Democrat to Republican during the 1960's because they didn't believe in the social progression of blacks. You are comparing apples and oranges which in this case is political association and culture. The 'Democrats' that you are refering to would be considered extremist right wing tea partiers today.
@Deb4Illinois You're an idiot. His name is on his official website.
While Democrats founded the KKK, THEN switched to being Republicans.. Timothy Mcvae, responsible for the Oklahoma City bombings was a Republican. OH NO!!
See how stupid this guilty by association with a political party is now? It's absurd, and nobody is buying it.
Republicans allow the poor to become rich and democrats give to the poor. The difference is that people will take advantage of any system and making it easier doesn't help anyone. Carter left the office with the country in economic ruin so no matter how much you give to the poor there is no middle class without a wealthy class.
Oh look at all those arrogant and self-righteous left-wing morons, like that liveralviewer with his nerdy asian voice, who think they know what's wrong or right for this nation. Oh my god Reagan took down solar panels, what a disaster! Guess he wasn't an elitist pro-environmental bullshit idiot. Can't believe the retarded uploader believes minimum wage laws (a job killer) and affirmative action (racism) is ''good''. Yea, just take more money from hard-working people as they are all ''greedy''.
@TheMarksmenCat They are not discussing if taking down the solar panels was a good policy or not. They are discussing the differences between both parties in terms of character
@BansheeGun Ronald Reagan was a social conservative and he was neither progressive or liberal in 1961, or at any point in his life, you stereotypical intellectually lazy conservative shit bag!
@BansheeGun Ronald Reagan was a social conservative and he was neither progressive or liberal in 1961 or at any point in his life, you stereotypical intellectually lazy conservative shit bag!
Colbert and Stewart fans: See the videos "Rush Limbaugh-Demagogues and Rabble", "The Tea Party, Circa 1860", "Obamacare-Little Petey Cronkite and Georgie Will", and "Rick Perry, Christian Rick the Perryman" at haldonrichardson1
Yes but barey. Obama, for example, has not shown any back bone or will to take on traditionally Democratic values. Instead, his actions say complete, right-wing Wall Street shill. While it can be argued McCain would have been worse, it is hard to see how. Without Obama leading the charge for austerity, it is unlikely the Democrats in congress would have been willing to sell out their constituents. Under McCain, it is unlikely Soc. Sec. could have been put on the fast-track for elimination.
ask Maxine Walters who helped to force banks into lending to people who could not afford a home, then defending Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae as sound and strong when the Republicans tried to fix them, and finally Maxine now is screaming for someone to help those poor people who are loosing their homes. Does that sound caring to you? Or does a system that feeds and houses an individual for a lifetime, even though that person is capable of working...is that caring?
Young man keep in mind that Ayn Rand lived through brutal communism when you speak about her. When natural desire to put one's own needs before the needs of the state could result in *liquidation*.
Read this!!!! from a New Zealander looking from the outside.
The reason the republicans continue to gain power is because they are organised selfish competitive buisnessmen and most importantly they have money. They use this money to push propaganda through the media and entertainment channels and have used this to manipulate the ignorant uneducated fearful people (christians) into voting for them. They enjoy confusion and fear because it stops people from seeing the obvious truths.
MikeyMacization mumbles, "republicans continue to gain power is because they .. manipulate the ignorant uneducated fearful people (christians) into voting for them."
Google: Poll Finds Tea Party Backers Wealthier and More Educated site:nytimes(doct)com
Educating American (and the World) one liberal at a time~raz
@razumfrackle i definitly agree that republicans have more wealth and as for education possibly tea party are well educated but in what bible studies lol. The majority of your votes come from non tea party members anyway so u cant claim that your educating me i know my shit.
@MikeyMacization Of course they do they can't possibly discuss things politely and rationally. They would be going against everything there party believes in
@unorthodoxJ Haha they just generally dislike anything that ether doesn't get them more power or money, and requires actual intelligence. Which is why they think art is a waste of time, music is the devil, video games cause murder, movies promote promiscuity, and anything against Christianity is obviously the work of communists.
I don't think it's fair to suggest that any political ideology is more inherently moral than another. Character flaws don't have a political agenda, we're all imperfect. I think republicans don't want to see rampant dependency on the federal government, and believe that liberal policies tend to be corrupted and twisted into a sort of justification for being lazy and blaming one's difficulties in life on someone else who happens to be well- off. The liberal point of view is pretty obvious.
@esjael Really? So you don't think that say, 19th century classical liberalism (known in the US today as libertarianims) is more moral than Stallnism?
In 2005, Barack Obama made $1.7 million -- more than twice President Bush's 2005 income of $735,180 -- but they both gave about the same amount to charity.
The years 1991, 1992 and 1993, Bush had incomes of $179,591, $212,313 and $610,772. His charitable contributions those years were $28,236, $31,914 and $31,292. Bush gave away more than 10 percent of his income each year.
In contrast, in 2006 and 2007, the Obamas gave only 5.8 percent and 6.1 percent of their income to charity.
When it comes to helping the needy, Brooks writes: "For too long, liberals have been claiming they are the most virtuous members of American society. Although they usually give less to charity, they have nevertheless lambasted conservatives for their callousness in the face of social injustice."
@razumfrackle And considering that Republican policies and beliefs undercut and take more away from people you'd think that they WOULD want to give something more back, but it's simply not the case.
In the book, [Arthur C. Brooks] cites extensive data analysis to demonstrate that values advocated by conservatives -- from church attendance and two-parent families to the Protestant work ethic and a distaste for government-funded social services -- make conservatives more generous than liberals.
@razumfrackle Untrue... because conservatives only donate to charaties that promote their own self interest. And the fact that Democrats support social programs that try to give other people chances they wouldn't normally have, social programs that are paid for through our taxes, liberals are far and away more generous. It's hilarious because you conservatives don't like the free handouts... you call that socialism. Lying coward.
greggymcgurks blurts, "conservatives only donate to charaties that promote their own self interest. And ... Democrats ... try to give other people chances".
Demonstrably false. Democrats support programs that take money from ANYONE BUT THEMSELVES purely for the purpose of garnishing votes from a gullible electorate.
Enter (D) tax cheats: Geithner, John Kerry, Charles Rangel, Tom Daschle
Google: Democratic Tax Cheats Outnumber Republican, 72% v. 28%
@greggymcgurks I'm sorry but you're just retarded. Claiming that conservatives only donate to charities "that promote their own self-interst" an absurdity on it's face, without any evidence that they don't donate to charities that do exactly what the liberals would have them do is just rampant deception combined with low IQ. And no I'm not a conservative.
The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservativism SYRACUSE, N.Y. -- Syracuse University professor Arthur C. Brooks is about to become the darling of the religious right in America -- and it's making him nervous. The child of academics, raised in a liberal household and educated in the liberal arts, Brooks has written a book that concludes religious conservatives donate far more money than secular liberals to all sorts of charitable activities, irrespective of income.
Is it OK to cheat on your taxes? A total of 57 percent of those who described themselves as “very liberal” said yes in response to the World Values Survey, compared with only 20 percent of those who are “very conservative.” When Pew Research asked whether it was “morally wrong” to cheat Uncle Sam, 86 percent of conservatives agreed, compared with only 68 percent of liberals.
Commentary - Peter Schweizer: Conservatives more honest than liberals?
I don't want a govenment that "cares" about me. I want a govenment that stays out of my life as much as possible so I can strive for the American Dream and not suffer because of those who believe the American Dream is an inherant right afforded to them by the govenment.
Reagan got rid of the solar panels, because they weren't saving the money that they were supposed to in the first place, not because he thought that they were useless. Also republicans may be more concerned with their community, but they definitely donate more to charities and people in need. We will donate when and how much we want to, we don't want to be told to donate our hard earned money. My family rose from dirt from past generations to the life i have now have and we dont want anyone tak
NO Dems are not more caring. In his book, Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism, Arthur C. Brooks presents research showing that religious conservatives are more charitable than secular liberals. He says people who support the idea that government should redistribute income are among the least likely to dig into their own wallets to help others. Included in his book is an analysis of 15 sets of data that he says all came to the same conclusion.
@MrBluzie51 ignore the FACTS in the video. Conservatives give to causes in their own neighborhoods, only to people they like, and with no education on what charity should have priority for the health of the nation.
Thank you republicans for the policies and extreme budget cuts. Now I am the only student worker left in my department simply because we lack the funds to hire more. but hey, can't take any money from the rich. face value: dem's want mandatory charity,not just a voluntary handful
@MrBluzie51 I had heard that before. However, you will notice if you look at these generosity indexes that the most "generous" states are in the bible belt. Many chritians donate money to causes that benefit themselves like Church fundraisers. But Dems. are much more likely to vote to raise taxes on themselves, to address bigger systemic problems like poverty or healthcare that may not directly affect them. Republicans on the other hand are more likely to be concerned with their own communities
@durhamdf You're an idiot. If they were truly trying to benefit themselves they would keep the money. It's not like you even present evidence that your idea that they donate only to local charities is even true.
A bit simple but ... Yes Democrats are more caring of the greater populace.
Both political parties have been moving toward serving their party only, and not the people in general. The GOP is far in the avant in this regard, but the Democrats are unfortunately learning that this is a better survival strategy in politics and are emulating it more each year.
As for promoting greed: Are Americans just not selfish enough? Is that what ails America?
@drfoxcourt Well actually yes. If Americans would just stop giving their money to the government to subsidise all these "needy" people, (many of whom are less needy than the taxpayers who provided the cash) most of their problems would go away.
@newperve "If Americans would just stop giving their money to the government to subsidise all these "needy" people"
There is a distinct difference between addressing those in real need and satisfying greed. America's tax policy of the past 30 years has not been oriented to the real needy, it has been oriented to those that can exercise their greed more effectively. Now that corporations are political persons, watch that trend accelerate.
Gross misinformation and liberal propaganda in this video. The truth is conservatives donate more than American Liberals by a mile in time, blood, and money (actual dollars as well as percentage of income). Not just to religious causes, but secular ones as well. No one has done a study as in depth on this subject as Aurthur C. Brooks. Read the studies. Inform yourself. Ignore the people in this video.
Yes ignore the FACTS in this video. Conservatives give to causes in their own neighborhoods, only to people they like, and with no education on what charity should have priority for the health of the nation.
They also consistently vote for politicians that have been trying to put old people, and people down on their luck, out into the street for DECADES, and who're trying to remove all restrictions that keep the wealthy elite from stripping the rest of us for every penny we have.
@schmoborama There are no FACTS in this video. Bill Maher, Carter, and the narrator have simply chosen their own delusions over reality. And you are also grossly misinformed. Republicans give more than Democrats to the poor, the handicapped, etc inside **AND** outside of their own neighborhoods. It is Democrats who don't give, and keep people poor by removing their incentives, perpetuate fatherless homes, and convince people they are victims unable to do anything without the government's help.
@joejjl -keep people poor by removing their incentives"
You mean by not running the US like a 3rd world country?? If ReCuntlicans give so fucking much why was there anyone who needed SS in the first place?? You think there was some fucking Utopia before SS? No poor people?? If Republicans are so fucking generous, why do they want to cut ALL SS and Medicare for OLD people who have PAID for it??
@gnatandbee SS is a ponzi scheme and by definition unsustainable. Sure there were poor people before SS, and now that we have SS there are STILL poor people just like there have been throughout the world since the beginning of time. So our government hasn't "fixed" anything. Most Republicans don't want to "cut" SS. They want to phase it out. If it was promised it, it should be paid. But we should take a lesson from Bernie Madoff and stop promising it now.
@joejjl -SS is a ponzi scheme and by definition unsustainable
Oh BS, the only reason it would be unsustainable is because greedy fucks keep cutting taxes on the rich hoping for a quick buck.
"we have SS there are STILL poor people" Yup you're republican. As long as there's a single poor person, SS failed and should be scrapped. Parents die when you're 6yrs old? Tough shit. Lose both kidneys from de-regulated processed food? Too fucking bad.
@gnatandbee The problem is that SS taxes are on the poor not the rich, so it's not the rich who are being "greedy" it's the guy on minimum wage who doesn't particularly want to spend his cash subsidising oldsters who own their own home.
"The problem is that SS taxes are on the poor not the rich"
The rich pay it, but are not eligible to recieve it, that's why they hate it.. Businesses have to pay half the SS tax for each of their employees, that's why they hate it.
@schmoborama No the rich don't pay as much of it proportionate to their income, and they are just as eligable . The "employer contribution" is effectively paid by the worker, not the business. Pushing up the non-wage cost of hiring someone (which the so-called employer contribution does) lowers the price at which labor is demanded, so workers pay for the "employer" part too. It's a con.
@gnatandbee If you think printing money and handing it out is a better alternative than wise investing, then you don't have a clear understanding of economics. If you think taking it from the "rich" will work, you have been duped. Not only does that erode capital investment and thus our future, "rich" people will eventually move their money out of your reach. Success as a nation comes through respect for individual liberty, not "spreading the wealth".
@joejjl ... WTF are you talking about? The wealthy are doing that NOW BECAUSE of the lower taxes handed to them over the last thirty years of Reaganomics! The top marginal rate on the wealthy was 91% for more than 40 years and the middle class grew because the wealthy simply kept pouring their money into investment, which helped keep the economy going! As the marginal rate declined, so did investment and the wealthy simply took that money and sent it to Switzerland... you MORON!!
@captfoster1 So when we raise taxes on the rich they keep their money in the US, but when we lower taxes they send it overseas? Can you please educate me on how that works?
@joejjl YES!! Do you have a reading problem? If taxes are high on the wealthy (and if those wealthy are smart) they keep their money in their business, since it would not be worth it to them to pull it out, hence the concept of keeping taxes high on high wealth... if taxes are lowered, they will see an opportunity to enrich themselves quickly by selling their business or pulling their investments in that business and then to keep from paying taxes in the USA, they will move it overseas.
@joejjl Are you so blind that you don't think the wealthy don't do that? Or those who have always dreamt of being wealthy wouldn't take that opportunity?
@joejjl You really have your right-wing corporate talking points all mapped out, huh. Only two kinds of people can possibly believe that SocSec is a Ponzi scheme... the Wall Street guy who is frothing at the mouth waiting to get his greedy hands on that delicious $2 trillion dollars and the moron who gets his information from the likes of Rush, Cluster Fox, or Ayn Rand. The rest who spew the Ponzi lie are just paid-for whores who will say or do anything for a paycheck!
@captfoster1 LIe all you want the actuarial information is out there. If it's promising money and it doesn't have the reserves to deliver it's a Ponzi scheme. The only argument is WHEN it's going to run out.
@joejjl okay you obviously dont know what social security came from and why: a time where the stock market crashed, dragging the economy with it. businesses were failing, nearly everyone in the US was broke. then came along FDR, rest his great soul, and helped us out of it. now in an economy there is recession, depression, recovery, and prosperity. we were brought into recovery and we got through the hardships. social security was made to help us out of the Great Depression and it did
@mysterykill Actually the economy didn't recover during FDR life and the New Deal was a complete failure economically, if not politically. Imposing a new tax on workers hardly would have boosted economic activity and SS didn't deliver anywhere near enough Keynsian stimulus to make a difference (in fact it drew money out of the economy in the first years).
@mysterykill A credible source to refute the opinions in this video is Arthur C. Brooks. He has been mentioned in several comments already. Read his study, then you can argue from an informed position.
@joejjl so not true about the republicans helping more the poor... There are much more poor people in countries where right-wing is predominant than in left-wing countries... The distribution of welfare in the USA is closer than other developed countries (like countries from Europe and East Asia) to third-world countries
@franklouuu like what countries? like African countries? Dumb moron. Socialist countries in the south americas make everyone poor, had it been a capitalist system for a few decades those people would be richer than european countries by now... finally some countries (namely Chile) know how to fix this left wing catastrophe. Everybody that preaches less government today aris ''selfish'' and ''greedy''. I hate you fucking smug libtards and armchair egalitarians, you know jack shit about economics
@TheMarksmenCat Sorry to tell you but most of those countries were ruled by right wing dictators. And none of them was "socialist".
Right now socialism only exist in northern europe, where democracy works much better, the middle class is stronger and people in average live better than in the USA
@mixmastermeeks Scandinavian countries for example. They are the new form of socialism. They try to reject the name for obvious reasons. But if you see how their systems work, it is socialism.
The communist countries like Cuba, USSR, North Korea were never socialist. They loved to use the word so they could fool everyone but they were, in fact, just dictators.
@franklouuu Well lets get specific. Exactly which Scandinavian countries are you talking about? Norway? Denmark? Sweden? All of the Scandinavian countries?
the funny thing about this video is that statistically republicans donate more to charity than democrats do and bill forgets to mention how not only clinton but clinton and bush came together to help haiti after the earthquake. Also democrats want to help poor by forcing people to give their money to the poor so they can continue sitting around doing nothing whereas republicans want to help the poor get jobs.
superstangs123 2 weeks ago
@xPSYKOxLIBBYx Listen to me PSYKO. I think you a good person who is not narrow. There is definitely a lot people doing a lot of good in our nation. We only hear what the news reports. Our ADRA was present at Hurricane Katrina working with the Red Cross. We weren't on the news and that's OK with us we just want to help. I'm only sharing this with you because I trust you're a good person and can see good in other areas in your life. Take care my friend.
loren719 2 weeks ago
@xPSYKOxLIBBYx Well my friend I certainly can't refute what you have seen. If indeed there are any churches that don't give to the poor then that would be a tragedy for sure. I can speak for my church. ******** Denomination has many organisations within it's self: SAWS, ADRA, MARANATHA BUILDERS, COMMUNITY SERVICES. These distribute food,clothing,ed materials, meds and build hosp.,schools, houses, churches and water systems-world wide. We're Conser.,we care & we're not the only church who does.
loren719 2 weeks ago
@xPSYKOxLIBBYx :-) (hehehe) Good morning sunshine!
loren719 2 weeks ago
ReplicCans care just like Reptiles.
DrDangDOGGone 1 month ago
Oh yes!! I'm a "moron" and "Democrats care more than Republicans" LOLOLOL Stop it your "killing" me HAHAHAHA!!!! Have a nice day you "caring" person you. :-)
loren719 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Very true. While it's true there are good and bad on both sides of the political spectrum, it seems more consistently true that Democrats just seem innately more compassionate.
The phrase (nee: oxymoron) 'compassionate conservative' had to be coined by Bush because it was so alien to the party's core values that it needed to be coined.
sebulia1 1 month ago
Comment removed
sebulia1 1 month ago
The RETHUGLIECANTS are what is wrong with America, They are fools that should be locked up so they can do no more harm.
jaxsdas56 1 month ago
I think democrat and republican is the same shit seriously.
QCBEC 1 month ago
The mean-spirited response of many of the right wingers who are posting on here answers the question perfectly.
chozenn1 1 month ago
I think it's the Republican politicians who are selfish; most republican voters seem sincere enough, just misguided and easily misled.
chozenn1 1 month ago
Socialism always fails. It has in the past and it will in the future, as sure as the sun will rise in the morning. All that needs to be said is, look at the state of the USA with it's debts and when it fails from the burden of hand out programs like Medicare that make the liberals feel good, then see just how much suffering there will be. It is much better to teach someone to fish than to give them food for a day.
questioneverything2 1 month ago
@questioneverything2 what has failed is the trickle down myth, if it was true we would be in great shape so it must be another right wing moron belief.
jaxsdas56 1 month ago
@jaxsdas56 Trickle down has made the wealthiest poor people in the world. The 80's & 90's were the most prosperous economies ever. The liberals like Obama just want to give everything away. Like no down payment home purchases for the poor paying only on the interest of that loan, that will adjust upward in 5 years, that causes the poor to hurt even more when they loose their home. All for what? just so a bleeding heart liberal can feel good for what they have done giving a loan to the poor.
questioneverything2 1 month ago
Carter also said that all southern white people are racist.
ripptorn9 1 month ago
@ripptorn9 He spoke the truth
jaxsdas56 1 month ago
@jaxsdas56 Then you are as dumb as he is but at least he can say it was senility.What's you STUPID ASS excuse.
ripptorn9 1 month ago
When was the last time a poor person gave anyone a paying job.......WOW
shadone11 1 month ago
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA are you kidding?....Liberals have lost their collective minds...
shadone11 1 month ago
This has got to be the funniest clip I have ever listened to on youtube.LOL I'm glad I'm NOT a Democrat, from this clip it sounds like it would be embarrassing!! LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.....oh stop it hahaha...I can't take it anymore HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!
loren719 1 month ago
@loren719 Moron
jaxsdas56 1 month ago
frankly in name Ron Paul the rich grasp on the party has taken the principles away
Democrats need the IRS AND STATE INCOME TAX we need to abolish the income tax and allow SSA to be voluntary at any time this is proportionate to the freedom and liberty of all citizen
massvocals1 1 month ago
the best way to help poor people is to stop inflation. Unskilled workers are the least likely to receive large pay raises, but are hit equally by inflation. Between 2000 and now, the dollar lost 20% of its value. That means the poor are 20% poorer.
nfries88 2 months ago
So Democrats care more because they take other people's money to give to other people. How is it "selfish" to ban people working for less than $X? How is throwing people who can't earn that much out of a job somehow selfless? How is giving to the richest age group by stealing from the poorest not "selfish"?
newperve 2 months ago
Im neither but Obama is a democrat and he obviously cares about the economy and the american people and that is why the economy is booming right now...People are people and it doesn't matter what party your for.
zzzhuh 2 months ago
not ONE republican will watch this......... period. Therefore. This video is unfortunately not relevant to anyone other that the people who already agree with what it is saying. sorry but that's the truth
woodstock8905 2 months ago
@edgewaterprog
and campaign finance statistics are readily available at opensecrets[dot]org
nfries88 2 months ago
@edgewaterprog
as for increasing regulation of the GSEs, which would have severely softened the subprime collapse... It's hard to find the letters, but several Democrats actually discouraged Bush from doing it. And this is coming from a guy who HATES Bush for getting us into these nonsensical blood money wars.
nfries88 2 months ago
@edgwaterprog
Google "Pelosi Visa IPO Stock" to see how Nanci Pelosi, as speaker, made a killing off Visa IPO stock that *would have been adversely affected by legislation she did not let come to a vote*.
Google "mean worker wages" and "Long Term U.S. Inflation" for my wages and inflation statistics.
Google "federal reserve secret bailout" to discover something FAR WORSE than TARP that was done completely in secret even from Congress.
nfries88 2 months ago
another thing democrats do is help illegal immigrants get social security cards so they can vote, maybe you should look more toward finding the problems with both sides instead of being a one sided prick
junkuff 2 months ago
We'll wake up one day and tel our children's children how we used to have 45 million Americans die due to lack of health care. We used to ban gay marriage and legislate religious bigotry. Much the same as we hear now the horror stories of the Great Depression which came after 3 Republican administrations in a row.
sinistar99 2 months ago
You guys must be the most exposed nation of propaganda in the world
hello12363062 2 months ago
democrats have done just as much to concentrate wealth in the hands of the wealthy as republicans.
making selfishness a virtue is stupid, but collectivist policies pushed by the left are indeed oppressive simply by their collectivist nature.
nfries88 2 months ago
@nfries88 dems have done just as much to concentrate wealth? Which Dem signed TARP? Which Republican gave us Social Security, or Medicare? There's a difference. Republicans are corporate lobbyists. Period.
sinistar99 2 months ago
@sinistar99 which Dem voted against TARP? Which Dem wanted to restrain the GSEs to prevent the market collapse that allowed for TARP? Which Dem wants to supervise the Federal Reserve, which is at the heart of that issue in the first place? Which Dem wants to end the Federal Reserve, which has through inflationary policy concentrated wealth in the hands of the Wall St fat-cats?
Dennis Kucinich is the only Dem that fits all of those basic requirements of truly giving a damn about *US*.
nfries88 2 months ago
@nfries88 Paul-Kucinich 2012!
newperve 2 months ago
@newperve I'd vote for that ticket
nfries88 2 months ago
@sinistar99
Republicans aren't alone. It's both parties! Almost all of them are in on the scam! They all sat back and let the Federal Reserve induce 2000% inflation over a century, while wages only went up 500%. Republican and Democrat made no difference in the matter. So where did that 1500% of wealth wind up? Overwhelmingly in Wall St, Defense contractors, and our very own Representatives! Get the picture!
nfries88 2 months ago
@sinistar99 nevermind that Obama received more campaign donations from Wall St than any other presidential campaign in history (look it up) and appointed Tim Geithner, a Wall St crony, to Secretary of the Treasury!
nfries88 2 months ago
@nfries88 Prove it....
edgwaterprog 2 months ago
@KellyAnnOR no worries, it's just that I tend to go ballistic whenever I see a channel like that, proudly exposing the lies and spins of the ''other side'', while nodding at any lie their team puts forward.
DREwestcoast 2 months ago
@KellyAnnOR The only immature thing is to naively think that any of the two party is the solution to our problems...
DREwestcoast 2 months ago
@KellyAnnOR You are correct about the Libertarian philosophy (the right) which wants to dismatle regulatory agencies and would urge citizens to use the courts for redress......BUT, the people who control the right want all this TORT reform so that basically citizens would have NO redress at all. We would just be fucked! How does that make sense??
We should be asking Ron Paul supporters what they think of TORT reform???
Check out "Hot Coffee"!
pimpingmrli 2 months ago
@KellyAnnOR You called me a fool first, and then I smoked your little gullible arse..
DREwestcoast 2 months ago
@KellyAnnOR Could please you elaborate on what radical changes Ron Paul wants to make that would be bad for the environment and the lower/middle class?
angramainyu992 2 months ago
@KellyAnnOR I never said that, what you seem to ignore is it's a scheme, in some of the most socialist places like QC, social security is funded through heavy taxation to the point where welfare recipients should have around 100k a year, obviously they only get a minuscule fraction, so where does the money go? Your assumptions about me are based on ignorance and bigotry, you're just a retarded and uneducated who wants big government to take them by the hand, leftist wacko..
DREwestcoast 2 months ago
@KellyAnnOR It only looks severe because you don't know how politically motivated these rotten institutions are, but you probably just don't know any better
DREwestcoast 2 months ago
@KellyAnnOR Way to use examples and pick them apart to where they,re completely out of context.. I never said conditions back then were good, but the financial system allowed for people to immigrate here and make a life for themselves, what the left doesn't seem to get is that no matter how well intentioned government is, they're going to waste your money, as for your ridiculous example, how about insurance you half-wit leftist wacko? I won't debate you if you use red herrings
DREwestcoast 2 months ago
@KellyAnnOR It would be a giant leap in the right direction. I would like to see our spending under control before we decide on the tax issue. I don't exactly agree with everything he says, but I think it is worth looking into. Everyone is entitled to their opinions =)
angramainyu992 2 months ago
@KellyAnnOR I still believe we could solve the problem without raising taxes for anyone, and make living affordable without depending on the wealthy. I don't really agree with tax cuts for the rich same with bailouts, the whole "trickle-down" concept doesn't really work.
angramainyu992 2 months ago
@KellyAnnOR why is the US unemployment rate at 1920's level? If your claim that government provided all these improvements by itself, where are the jobs that could be occupied by the 'poor' people, that's the problem of the lefties, they think of poors as a static class, with no ability whatsoever to make a living for themselves, so they accept the idea of being robbed by government programs that do little to nothing to raise the poors up, also you only look at the upside -->
DREwestcoast 2 months ago
of these programs, while overlooking the government debt, heavy taxation, and regulatory control that it implies, what's going to happen to the poor when the heavy government apparatus that provided them for years starts to fail? you'll have MUCH worse working conditions under such conditions that you would have in the 20's
DREwestcoast 2 months ago
@KellyAnnOR here's an even better question, why did the US industrial revolution produce so much wealth/opportunities for individuals who came from all over the world, it hardly would of made sense for immigrants to come to this country if the situation was qualitatively worse than elsewhere, that's not to discount the injustices that were made, but the claim that gov-backed workers unions are the reason why conditions improved is fallacious, again, there's a huge difference between-
DREwestcoast 2 months ago
..allowing workers to form associations to possibly improve their conditions or set up insurance programs of sorts, and enforcing these unions via government to where they have monopoly on the employer-ee contract, that's my issue with these government regulations, I'm not saying unions didn't do any good, in fact I am for unions, just not in the autocratic form they exist today.
DREwestcoast 2 months ago
@KellyAnnOR that's not going to happen, since nobody would accept such an underpay considering the diminished purchasing power, and what if they're offered a job that's a dollar under the imposed minimum and they *decide to take it up and maybe work their way up and then if their skills and efforts are good enough they might wind up getting paid more than the imposed minimum in the end, if the labor thinks it's value is greater than his job will give him he ought to find another one.
DREwestcoast 2 months ago
@KellyAnnOR I think the problem has more to do with the size and poor management of our government.
angramainyu992 2 months ago
@KellyAnnOR I was under the assumption that we were talking about average americans, not billionaires. I think people should have the right to the money that they rightfully earn. I think it would be unfair to charge them more for the same goods and services because they are wealthy. If I go to a grocery store; should they charge me based on my salary? I think the real issue is, why are taxes so expensive and why so many can't afford to pay them.
angramainyu992 2 months ago
@KellyAnnOR Is it not selfish to demand someone else for their money? Is it logical waist that money on inept government programs? Where I live their are many republicans and libertarians that donate to charities, but we would rather give our money to privately run charities and organizations so that they can more effectively use it. Most politicians, whether they are republican or democrat, are corrupt.
angramainyu992 2 months ago
minimum wage doesn't do anywhere near as much for the poor than you try to paint it, I'm afraid you're just another left shill, no better than the crazy demagogs on Fox..
DREwestcoast 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DEMOCRATS FOR RON PAUL!!!!
BLUEREPUBLICAN(dot)COM
bonita123303 2 months ago
YES and YES!
TheChamseyCampaign 3 months ago
I agree with a lot of these points and find myself leaning to the more democratic side when it comes to social issues. Mostly, I consider myself a moderate, but yet I want to vote for Republican candidate Ron Paul....sigh* politics can be pretty confusing sometimes.
CombatMedicBuddy 3 months ago
Caring ? i have family and friends i care about....who the hell are you ?
SongSwan 3 months ago
@SongSwan You care about your family and friends but the point is you don't care about those who suffer, those who you perhaps don't know.
blueberryxmuffins 3 months ago
@blueberryxmuffins The point is its not your job or governments job to tell me who to care for,my family and friends are people to and my resources are mine to give to who i choose....taxing me to the point where it is hard to care for them or myself to satisfy you and what you think my resources should be used for is a form of tyranny....someone has said " when you use force to do good you get evil"
SongSwan 3 months ago
This is purely a silly video.
You've introduced some serious equivocation here. Neoconservatism, what you equate with the Republican Party, does rationalize capitalism with some sense of rugged individualism. As a small-L Republican (and there are far more than you may assume) and someone working on his PhD in economics, my opposition--like many others--had everything to do with compassion. Rationing any good has never produced results for the most marginalized in society...
Ooftyman 3 months ago
Fuck both Parties. This is not the real issue.
KhmaiTone1 3 months ago
Comment removed
mrmrhodes 3 months ago
jjjj
mrmrhodes 3 months ago
Comment removed
mrmrhodes 3 months ago
. viewer- you said that democrats are responsible helping women and minorities get equal rights, well your right, i.e. Kennedy. Historically republicans have been more on the side of freedom. It doesnt necessarily mean that they care for the individuals but they care about american freedom. The main opposition to the civil rights bill were democrats. The same as in the 1860's Democrats apposed civil rights while radical republicans fought for them.. i.e. Lincoln
mrmrhodes 3 months ago
@mrmrhodes , let us be reminded the Republican Party TODAY are not comprise of people like Abraham Lincoln. They are DEAD. The Republican Party TODAY is not the same party during Lincoln's time.
PungiFungi 3 months ago
why do we always have to choose between the lesser of two evils?
theMrjradical 3 months ago
liberalviewer works for the Democratic administration, which is why he can not use his name..never heed the advice or proposal from a hidden coward..Democratic Party Officials founded the KuKlux Klan, how helpful and caring was that......
Deb4Illinois 3 months ago
@Deb4Illinois Its also a well known fact that the Ku Klux Klan originated from White supremicists in the South that flipped from being Democrat to Republican during the 1960's because they didn't believe in the social progression of blacks. You are comparing apples and oranges which in this case is political association and culture. The 'Democrats' that you are refering to would be considered extremist right wing tea partiers today.
Letsb3realhere 3 months ago
@Deb4Illinois You're an idiot. His name is on his official website.
While Democrats founded the KKK, THEN switched to being Republicans.. Timothy Mcvae, responsible for the Oklahoma City bombings was a Republican. OH NO!!
See how stupid this guilty by association with a political party is now? It's absurd, and nobody is buying it.
TBird4490 3 months ago
@Deb4Illinois the KKK were not only Republicans, but also Christians.
haleygoeswhoohoo 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Please subscribe. Videos soon.
ThatCrazyLiberal 3 months ago
Republicans allow the poor to become rich and democrats give to the poor. The difference is that people will take advantage of any system and making it easier doesn't help anyone. Carter left the office with the country in economic ruin so no matter how much you give to the poor there is no middle class without a wealthy class.
StupidCommentsMademe 4 months ago
Oh look at all those arrogant and self-righteous left-wing morons, like that liveralviewer with his nerdy asian voice, who think they know what's wrong or right for this nation. Oh my god Reagan took down solar panels, what a disaster! Guess he wasn't an elitist pro-environmental bullshit idiot. Can't believe the retarded uploader believes minimum wage laws (a job killer) and affirmative action (racism) is ''good''. Yea, just take more money from hard-working people as they are all ''greedy''.
TheMarksmenCat 4 months ago
@TheMarksmenCat They are not discussing if taking down the solar panels was a good policy or not. They are discussing the differences between both parties in terms of character
franklouuu 4 months ago
Ronald Reagan....Good Riddance
andrewcardiac 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You republicunts are destroying our great country.
Now go fuck yourselves.
ohYew812 5 months ago
yes and yes
cooky5479 5 months ago
Ronald Reagan was a Democrat in 1961 you Dumbass.
BansheeGun 5 months ago
@BansheeGun Nope... he wasn't a democrat as we know them...the was a dixiecrat. .
vparonto 5 months ago
@BansheeGun Ronald Reagan was a social conservative and he was neither progressive or liberal in 1961, or at any point in his life, you stereotypical intellectually lazy conservative shit bag!
mrekbass 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@BansheeGun Ronald Reagan was a social conservative and he was neither progressive or liberal in 1961 or at any point in his life, you stereotypical intellectually lazy conservative shit bag!
mrekbass 5 months ago
Colbert and Stewart fans: See the videos "Rush Limbaugh-Demagogues and Rabble", "The Tea Party, Circa 1860", "Obamacare-Little Petey Cronkite and Georgie Will", and "Rick Perry, Christian Rick the Perryman" at haldonrichardson1
haldonrichardson1 5 months ago
Republicans support tax cuts for the very wealthy.
When we speak out to make the super rich pay their fair share of % of their taxes, its called "Class Warfare".
curingaging00 5 months ago
GO. TO. HELL.
DoctorMurky 5 months ago
Great video ! I hope this country finally wakes up and realize Republicans only help the rich.
whitewitchoz 5 months ago
republicans only want rich to be richer
poluiso 6 months ago 12
@poluiso and the poor the be poorer
cooky5479 5 months ago
Yes but barey. Obama, for example, has not shown any back bone or will to take on traditionally Democratic values. Instead, his actions say complete, right-wing Wall Street shill. While it can be argued McCain would have been worse, it is hard to see how. Without Obama leading the charge for austerity, it is unlikely the Democrats in congress would have been willing to sell out their constituents. Under McCain, it is unlikely Soc. Sec. could have been put on the fast-track for elimination.
0gods 6 months ago
ask Maxine Walters who helped to force banks into lending to people who could not afford a home, then defending Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae as sound and strong when the Republicans tried to fix them, and finally Maxine now is screaming for someone to help those poor people who are loosing their homes. Does that sound caring to you? Or does a system that feeds and houses an individual for a lifetime, even though that person is capable of working...is that caring?
vklmno 6 months ago
Young man keep in mind that Ayn Rand lived through brutal communism when you speak about her. When natural desire to put one's own needs before the needs of the state could result in *liquidation*.
Hokibukisa 6 months ago
Read this!!!! from a New Zealander looking from the outside.
The reason the republicans continue to gain power is because they are organised selfish competitive buisnessmen and most importantly they have money. They use this money to push propaganda through the media and entertainment channels and have used this to manipulate the ignorant uneducated fearful people (christians) into voting for them. They enjoy confusion and fear because it stops people from seeing the obvious truths.
MikeyMacization 7 months ago
MikeyMacization mumbles, "republicans continue to gain power is because they .. manipulate the ignorant uneducated fearful people (christians) into voting for them."
Google: Poll Finds Tea Party Backers Wealthier and More Educated site:nytimes(doct)com
Educating American (and the World) one liberal at a time~raz
razumfrackle 6 months ago
@razumfrackle i definitly agree that republicans have more wealth and as for education possibly tea party are well educated but in what bible studies lol. The majority of your votes come from non tea party members anyway so u cant claim that your educating me i know my shit.
MikeyMacization 6 months ago
@MikeyMacization, "u cant claim that your educating me i know .. shit"
Couldn't have said it better myself.
razumfrackle 6 months ago
@razumfrackle as usual the republican miss qoutes and slanders the opposition.
MikeyMacization 6 months ago
@MikeyMacization Of course they do they can't possibly discuss things politely and rationally. They would be going against everything there party believes in
XxSequndaEtapaXx 5 months ago
@razumfrackle Geez way to completely prove how Republicans miss quote and slander the opposite argument when they feel threatened -_-
XxSequndaEtapaXx 5 months ago
@XxSequndaEtapaXx, don't you have some important videogames to play or something?
razumfrackle 5 months ago
@razumfrackle What does the fact I play videogames have anything to do with my political views, and my ability to see quote mining and slander?
XxSequndaEtapaXx 5 months ago
@XxSequndaEtapaXx I've always had the opinion that they feel art is a waste of time unless it's getting a tattoo of the cross
unorthodoxJ 5 months ago
@unorthodoxJ Haha they just generally dislike anything that ether doesn't get them more power or money, and requires actual intelligence. Which is why they think art is a waste of time, music is the devil, video games cause murder, movies promote promiscuity, and anything against Christianity is obviously the work of communists.
XxSequndaEtapaXx 5 months ago
great analysis. Keep it up.
ianniedabomb 7 months ago
I don't think it's fair to suggest that any political ideology is more inherently moral than another. Character flaws don't have a political agenda, we're all imperfect. I think republicans don't want to see rampant dependency on the federal government, and believe that liberal policies tend to be corrupted and twisted into a sort of justification for being lazy and blaming one's difficulties in life on someone else who happens to be well- off. The liberal point of view is pretty obvious.
esjael 7 months ago
@esjael Really? So you don't think that say, 19th century classical liberalism (known in the US today as libertarianims) is more moral than Stallnism?
newperve 2 months ago
FACTS:
In 2005, Barack Obama made $1.7 million -- more than twice President Bush's 2005 income of $735,180 -- but they both gave about the same amount to charity.
The years 1991, 1992 and 1993, Bush had incomes of $179,591, $212,313 and $610,772. His charitable contributions those years were $28,236, $31,914 and $31,292. Bush gave away more than 10 percent of his income each year.
In contrast, in 2006 and 2007, the Obamas gave only 5.8 percent and 6.1 percent of their income to charity.
razumfrackle 7 months ago
@razumfrackle FACTS: Posting comments doesn't do anything.
FACTS: Make a video and take your time to explain it or write a book.
FACTS: I am not against you or trying to offend you. Its just a shame that appearently you did alot of research and you let it go to waste
kutzak159 7 months ago
@kutzak159, "Its just a shame that appearently you did alot of research and you let it go to waste"
ha, you're the one letting it go to waste.
razumfrackle 7 months ago
@razumfrackle
"FACTS",
Citations?
BeBoBli 6 months ago
@razumfrackle But then you have to look at those charities. Democrats care more then Republicans.
greggymcgurks 6 months ago
FACTS:
When it comes to helping the needy, Brooks writes: "For too long, liberals have been claiming they are the most virtuous members of American society. Although they usually give less to charity, they have nevertheless lambasted conservatives for their callousness in the face of social injustice."
razumfrackle 7 months ago
@razumfrackle And considering that Republican policies and beliefs undercut and take more away from people you'd think that they WOULD want to give something more back, but it's simply not the case.
greggymcgurks 6 months ago
FACTS:
In the book, [Arthur C. Brooks] cites extensive data analysis to demonstrate that values advocated by conservatives -- from church attendance and two-parent families to the Protestant work ethic and a distaste for government-funded social services -- make conservatives more generous than liberals.
razumfrackle 7 months ago
@razumfrackle Untrue... because conservatives only donate to charaties that promote their own self interest. And the fact that Democrats support social programs that try to give other people chances they wouldn't normally have, social programs that are paid for through our taxes, liberals are far and away more generous. It's hilarious because you conservatives don't like the free handouts... you call that socialism. Lying coward.
greggymcgurks 6 months ago
greggymcgurks blurts, "conservatives only donate to charaties that promote their own self interest. And ... Democrats ... try to give other people chances".
Demonstrably false. Democrats support programs that take money from ANYONE BUT THEMSELVES purely for the purpose of garnishing votes from a gullible electorate.
Enter (D) tax cheats: Geithner, John Kerry, Charles Rangel, Tom Daschle
Google: Democratic Tax Cheats Outnumber Republican, 72% v. 28%
FACTS are stubborn things.
razumfrackle 6 months ago
@greggymcgurks I'm sorry but you're just retarded. Claiming that conservatives only donate to charities "that promote their own self-interst" an absurdity on it's face, without any evidence that they don't donate to charities that do exactly what the liberals would have them do is just rampant deception combined with low IQ. And no I'm not a conservative.
newperve 2 months ago
FACTS:
The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservativism SYRACUSE, N.Y. -- Syracuse University professor Arthur C. Brooks is about to become the darling of the religious right in America -- and it's making him nervous. The child of academics, raised in a liberal household and educated in the liberal arts, Brooks has written a book that concludes religious conservatives donate far more money than secular liberals to all sorts of charitable activities, irrespective of income.
razumfrackle 7 months ago
FACTS:
Is it OK to cheat on your taxes? A total of 57 percent of those who described themselves as “very liberal” said yes in response to the World Values Survey, compared with only 20 percent of those who are “very conservative.” When Pew Research asked whether it was “morally wrong” to cheat Uncle Sam, 86 percent of conservatives agreed, compared with only 68 percent of liberals.
Commentary - Peter Schweizer: Conservatives more honest than liberals?
The Examiner
razumfrackle 7 months ago
I don't want a govenment that "cares" about me. I want a govenment that stays out of my life as much as possible so I can strive for the American Dream and not suffer because of those who believe the American Dream is an inherant right afforded to them by the govenment.
4PFrog 7 months ago 2
republicans are generally rich jerks
dancthegr 7 months ago
Reagan got rid of the solar panels, because they weren't saving the money that they were supposed to in the first place, not because he thought that they were useless. Also republicans may be more concerned with their community, but they definitely donate more to charities and people in need. We will donate when and how much we want to, we don't want to be told to donate our hard earned money. My family rose from dirt from past generations to the life i have now have and we dont want anyone tak
ThePOTUS22 7 months ago
NO Dems are not more caring. In his book, Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism, Arthur C. Brooks presents research showing that religious conservatives are more charitable than secular liberals. He says people who support the idea that government should redistribute income are among the least likely to dig into their own wallets to help others. Included in his book is an analysis of 15 sets of data that he says all came to the same conclusion.
MrBluzie51 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrBluzie51 ignore the FACTS in the video. Conservatives give to causes in their own neighborhoods, only to people they like, and with no education on what charity should have priority for the health of the nation.
Thank you republicans for the policies and extreme budget cuts. Now I am the only student worker left in my department simply because we lack the funds to hire more. but hey, can't take any money from the rich. face value: dem's want mandatory charity,not just a voluntary handful
tamu77095 7 months ago
@MrBluzie51 I had heard that before. However, you will notice if you look at these generosity indexes that the most "generous" states are in the bible belt. Many chritians donate money to causes that benefit themselves like Church fundraisers. But Dems. are much more likely to vote to raise taxes on themselves, to address bigger systemic problems like poverty or healthcare that may not directly affect them. Republicans on the other hand are more likely to be concerned with their own communities
durhamdf 7 months ago
@durhamdf You're an idiot. If they were truly trying to benefit themselves they would keep the money. It's not like you even present evidence that your idea that they donate only to local charities is even true.
newperve 2 months ago
Replublicans basicaly kiss ass to the rich.
yamasta103 7 months ago
A bit simple but ... Yes Democrats are more caring of the greater populace.
Both political parties have been moving toward serving their party only, and not the people in general. The GOP is far in the avant in this regard, but the Democrats are unfortunately learning that this is a better survival strategy in politics and are emulating it more each year.
As for promoting greed: Are Americans just not selfish enough? Is that what ails America?
drfoxcourt 7 months ago
@drfoxcourt Well actually yes. If Americans would just stop giving their money to the government to subsidise all these "needy" people, (many of whom are less needy than the taxpayers who provided the cash) most of their problems would go away.
newperve 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@newperve "If Americans would just stop giving their money to the government to subsidise all these "needy" people"
There is a distinct difference between addressing those in real need and satisfying greed. America's tax policy of the past 30 years has not been oriented to the real needy, it has been oriented to those that can exercise their greed more effectively. Now that corporations are political persons, watch that trend accelerate.
drfoxcourt 2 months ago
Gross misinformation and liberal propaganda in this video. The truth is conservatives donate more than American Liberals by a mile in time, blood, and money (actual dollars as well as percentage of income). Not just to religious causes, but secular ones as well. No one has done a study as in depth on this subject as Aurthur C. Brooks. Read the studies. Inform yourself. Ignore the people in this video.
joejjl 7 months ago
@joejjl
Yes ignore the FACTS in this video. Conservatives give to causes in their own neighborhoods, only to people they like, and with no education on what charity should have priority for the health of the nation.
They also consistently vote for politicians that have been trying to put old people, and people down on their luck, out into the street for DECADES, and who're trying to remove all restrictions that keep the wealthy elite from stripping the rest of us for every penny we have.
schmoborama 7 months ago
@schmoborama There are no FACTS in this video. Bill Maher, Carter, and the narrator have simply chosen their own delusions over reality. And you are also grossly misinformed. Republicans give more than Democrats to the poor, the handicapped, etc inside **AND** outside of their own neighborhoods. It is Democrats who don't give, and keep people poor by removing their incentives, perpetuate fatherless homes, and convince people they are victims unable to do anything without the government's help.
joejjl 5 months ago
@joejjl -keep people poor by removing their incentives"
You mean by not running the US like a 3rd world country?? If ReCuntlicans give so fucking much why was there anyone who needed SS in the first place?? You think there was some fucking Utopia before SS? No poor people?? If Republicans are so fucking generous, why do they want to cut ALL SS and Medicare for OLD people who have PAID for it??
gnatandbee 5 months ago
@gnatandbee SS is a ponzi scheme and by definition unsustainable. Sure there were poor people before SS, and now that we have SS there are STILL poor people just like there have been throughout the world since the beginning of time. So our government hasn't "fixed" anything. Most Republicans don't want to "cut" SS. They want to phase it out. If it was promised it, it should be paid. But we should take a lesson from Bernie Madoff and stop promising it now.
joejjl 5 months ago
@joejjl -SS is a ponzi scheme and by definition unsustainable
Oh BS, the only reason it would be unsustainable is because greedy fucks keep cutting taxes on the rich hoping for a quick buck.
"we have SS there are STILL poor people" Yup you're republican. As long as there's a single poor person, SS failed and should be scrapped. Parents die when you're 6yrs old? Tough shit. Lose both kidneys from de-regulated processed food? Too fucking bad.
gnatandbee 5 months ago
@gnatandbee The problem is that SS taxes are on the poor not the rich, so it's not the rich who are being "greedy" it's the guy on minimum wage who doesn't particularly want to spend his cash subsidising oldsters who own their own home.
newperve 2 months ago
@newperve
"The problem is that SS taxes are on the poor not the rich"
The rich pay it, but are not eligible to recieve it, that's why they hate it.. Businesses have to pay half the SS tax for each of their employees, that's why they hate it.
schmoborama 1 month ago
@schmoborama No the rich don't pay as much of it proportionate to their income, and they are just as eligable . The "employer contribution" is effectively paid by the worker, not the business. Pushing up the non-wage cost of hiring someone (which the so-called employer contribution does) lowers the price at which labor is demanded, so workers pay for the "employer" part too. It's a con.
newperve 1 month ago
@joejjl
Oh I should add - Lose all your retirement savings to Wall St.'s fucking around? TOO FUCKING BAD.
And you people STILL think investments are better than SS???
gnatandbee 5 months ago
@gnatandbee If you think printing money and handing it out is a better alternative than wise investing, then you don't have a clear understanding of economics. If you think taking it from the "rich" will work, you have been duped. Not only does that erode capital investment and thus our future, "rich" people will eventually move their money out of your reach. Success as a nation comes through respect for individual liberty, not "spreading the wealth".
joejjl 5 months ago
@joejjl ... WTF are you talking about? The wealthy are doing that NOW BECAUSE of the lower taxes handed to them over the last thirty years of Reaganomics! The top marginal rate on the wealthy was 91% for more than 40 years and the middle class grew because the wealthy simply kept pouring their money into investment, which helped keep the economy going! As the marginal rate declined, so did investment and the wealthy simply took that money and sent it to Switzerland... you MORON!!
captfoster1 5 months ago
@captfoster1 So when we raise taxes on the rich they keep their money in the US, but when we lower taxes they send it overseas? Can you please educate me on how that works?
joejjl 4 months ago
@joejjl YES!! Do you have a reading problem? If taxes are high on the wealthy (and if those wealthy are smart) they keep their money in their business, since it would not be worth it to them to pull it out, hence the concept of keeping taxes high on high wealth... if taxes are lowered, they will see an opportunity to enrich themselves quickly by selling their business or pulling their investments in that business and then to keep from paying taxes in the USA, they will move it overseas.
captfoster1 4 months ago
@joejjl Are you so blind that you don't think the wealthy don't do that? Or those who have always dreamt of being wealthy wouldn't take that opportunity?
captfoster1 4 months ago
@joejjl You really have your right-wing corporate talking points all mapped out, huh. Only two kinds of people can possibly believe that SocSec is a Ponzi scheme... the Wall Street guy who is frothing at the mouth waiting to get his greedy hands on that delicious $2 trillion dollars and the moron who gets his information from the likes of Rush, Cluster Fox, or Ayn Rand. The rest who spew the Ponzi lie are just paid-for whores who will say or do anything for a paycheck!
captfoster1 5 months ago
@captfoster1 LIe all you want the actuarial information is out there. If it's promising money and it doesn't have the reserves to deliver it's a Ponzi scheme. The only argument is WHEN it's going to run out.
newperve 2 months ago
@joejjl okay you obviously dont know what social security came from and why: a time where the stock market crashed, dragging the economy with it. businesses were failing, nearly everyone in the US was broke. then came along FDR, rest his great soul, and helped us out of it. now in an economy there is recession, depression, recovery, and prosperity. we were brought into recovery and we got through the hardships. social security was made to help us out of the Great Depression and it did
mysterykill 4 months ago
@mysterykill Is SS helping us out of this recent recession we're trying to recover from? How did we get out of recessions before FDR came along?
joejjl 4 months ago
@mysterykill Actually the economy didn't recover during FDR life and the New Deal was a complete failure economically, if not politically. Imposing a new tax on workers hardly would have boosted economic activity and SS didn't deliver anywhere near enough Keynsian stimulus to make a difference (in fact it drew money out of the economy in the first years).
newperve 2 months ago
@joejjl so dont bitch about things you dont know. and look under CREDIBLE sources, not the wikipidea shit that i see at the top of the search screen
mysterykill 4 months ago
@mysterykill A credible source to refute the opinions in this video is Arthur C. Brooks. He has been mentioned in several comments already. Read his study, then you can argue from an informed position.
joejjl 4 months ago
@joejjl so not true about the republicans helping more the poor... There are much more poor people in countries where right-wing is predominant than in left-wing countries... The distribution of welfare in the USA is closer than other developed countries (like countries from Europe and East Asia) to third-world countries
franklouuu 4 months ago
@franklouuu like what countries? like African countries? Dumb moron. Socialist countries in the south americas make everyone poor, had it been a capitalist system for a few decades those people would be richer than european countries by now... finally some countries (namely Chile) know how to fix this left wing catastrophe. Everybody that preaches less government today aris ''selfish'' and ''greedy''. I hate you fucking smug libtards and armchair egalitarians, you know jack shit about economics
TheMarksmenCat 4 months ago
@TheMarksmenCat Sorry to tell you but most of those countries were ruled by right wing dictators. And none of them was "socialist".
Right now socialism only exist in northern europe, where democracy works much better, the middle class is stronger and people in average live better than in the USA
franklouuu 4 months ago
@franklouuu Really? Well tell me which Northern European nations are socialist?
mixmastermeeks 3 months ago
@mixmastermeeks Scandinavian countries for example. They are the new form of socialism. They try to reject the name for obvious reasons. But if you see how their systems work, it is socialism.
The communist countries like Cuba, USSR, North Korea were never socialist. They loved to use the word so they could fool everyone but they were, in fact, just dictators.
franklouuu 3 months ago
@franklouuu Well lets get specific. Exactly which Scandinavian countries are you talking about? Norway? Denmark? Sweden? All of the Scandinavian countries?
mixmastermeeks 3 months ago