Anyone else find it odd that

[Jan Itor]

I find it disappointing that instead of giving actual details of how they will solve our problems, the Republicans simply bash the government and declare that somehow the problems will magically solve themselves. Not very reassuring talk from the people who will be put in charge.

And I disagree that the job of the President is to depend upon the market to relieve him of having to do any actual work.

Has Hillary given "details" of any of her promises? The answer is no. The GOPers in the debate did answer with their vision of the solutions, you just don't agree with them. As for the details, I would have thought you'd figured it out by now. No Candidate is going to give full details of their vision, because all that does is give the others something to pick apart, with truth or lies. That, and 30 seconds isn't a lot of time to get anything real meaningful out.

Again, tell us all the details your Hillary has put forth so far in her campaign. Can we feel disappointed in her like you feel disappointed with the GOP candidates?

 

[The Tradition]

All of these would be far worse without the government. Take poverty rates, for example. Poverty plummeted after Social Security. It has undoubtedly been a good thing for seniors.

Gee... I wonder why they picked 1935 as the start year for this chart?

In China, people are obligated by law to take care of their aging parents. I hate to use China as an example of anything done correctly, but there it is.

 

[dandh]

Gee... I wonder why they picked 1935 as the start year for this chart?

In China, people are obligated by law to take care of their aging parents. I hate to use China as an example of anything done correctly, but there it is.

Hmmm....

US GDP 1935 - 73 billion
US GDP 2015 - 17,913 billion

 

[cigaretteman]

The solution to almost every problem during the GOP debate was that the private market will solve it? I'm not sure any of the Republican candidates know what job they're applying for. It is the leader of the Federal government. If you're not going to use the Federal government to solve anything, you're basically admitting that you won't be doing anything once elected.

Don't really find it odd at all. The Republicans haven't had a new idea in years. They just keep clinging to their long disproven mantra of tax cuts for the rich, trickle down economics and deregulation of the private sector with the predictable disastrous results whenever they're tried.

 

[moral_victory]

Don't really find it odd at all. The Republicans haven't had a new idea in years. They just keep clinging to their long disproven mantra of tax cuts for the rich, trickle down economics and deregulation of the private sector with the predictable disastrous results whenever they're tried.

If you just give it 40 more years it could start to work.

 

[Bulldogs1974]

and allow everyone to have a medical savings account of like 25K they save up eventually, tax deferred, and a simple issue catastrophic plan with 25K deductible, no health questions

more government regulation? who knew you were a big government guy.

 

[The Tradition]

Don't really find it odd at all. The Republicans haven't had a new idea in years. They just keep clinging to their long disproven mantra of tax cuts for the rich, trickle down economics and deregulation of the private sector with the predictable disastrous results whenever they're tried.

Yeah! Deregulation has terrible consequences!

http://www.theatlantic.com/business...50-in-30-years-and-why-nobody-noticed/273506/

 

[Lone Clone]

Damn government forcing their fiat money system down our throats. I have a surplus of chickens, and no where to spend them!

You and Bruce Braley.

 

[HawktimusPrime]

The solution to almost every problem during the GOP debate was that the private market will solve it? I'm not sure any of the Republican candidates know what job they're applying for. It is the leader of the Federal government. If you're not going to use the Federal government to solve anything, you're basically admitting that you won't be doing anything once elected.

Isn't it odd that Liberals solution to every problem is throw money at the Government?

 

[HawktimusPrime]

At this point I really think the Republicans need to stop pretending they're for freedom. Dictating who you can marry, what language you can speak, and trying to build literal walls around our country is the opposite of freedom.

I agree, get rid of them and destroy the Liberals as well. You're both badly behaved idiot children, who need to be spanked accordingly.

You don't care either Huey, let's not pretend that you actually do. I've carved you out for who and what you actually are. A follower is what that is, nothing more.

 

[HawktimusPrime]

Or it failed because healthcare only functions properly when the government steps in to takes it over. The entire developed world uses government based healthcare. There simply aren't very many countries who use market based healthcare successfully. In fact, I can't think of one. They all seem to be second or even third tier systems.

Not this government Huey, not when this government whether ran by your idiot liberals, or the idiot Cons alike are most interested in military expansion.

Grow up.

 

[HawktimusPrime]

If you just give it 40 more years it could start to work.

You agree with this stupidity when you've seen what regulation did to the health insurance industry? You guys are fabulously ridiculous.

 

[HawktimusPrime]

Damn government forcing their fiat money system down our throats. I have a surplus of chickens, and no where to spend them!

Delightful!!!!, liberals who love and defend fiat currency. Which is a currency that is quite literally based on 'faith'.

You guys are beautifully warped. I love it.

 

[moral_victory]

You agree with this stupidity when you've seen what regulation did to the health insurance industry? You guys are fabulously ridiculous.

True, we should erradicate the health insurance industry.

 

[HawktimusPrime]

I find it disappointing that instead of giving actual details of how they will solve our problems, the Republicans simply bash the government and declare that somehow the problems will magically solve themselves. Not very reassuring talk from the people who will be put in charge.

fwqerewrbjr jbho2ngfu98

True, we should erradicate the health insurance industry.

g that continually takes from you and does little el

 

[moral_victory]

Delightful!!!!, liberals who love and defend fiat currency. Which is a currency that is quite literally based on 'faith'.

You guys are beautifully warped. I love it.

I am complaining about a surplus of chickens. Geez.

 

[cigaretteman]

Delightful!!!!, liberals who love and defend fiat currency. Which is a currency that is quite literally based on 'faith'.

You guys are beautifully warped. I love it.

As is any type of currency.

 

[HawktimusPrime]

True, we should erradicate the health insurance industry.

Well, you guys are using regulations and the underlying issues with our fiat currency to do just that. Give it time.....

 

[HawktimusPrime]

As is any type of currency.

Which is why everyone has so much debt. Coincidence? Or are you excited about the barter economy that Greece is enjoying right now.

 

[moral_victory]

Well, you guys are using regulations and the underlying issues with our fiat currency to do just that. Give it time.....

I am.

 

[aflachawk]

The solution to almost every problem during the GOP debate was that the private market will solve it? I'm not sure any of the Republican candidates know what job they're applying for. It is the leader of the Federal government. If you're not going to use the Federal government to solve anything, you're basically admitting that you won't be doing anything once elected.

Private markets? Evidently you were not listening or too stupid to understand what you we're hearing. But what they are saying Is let the Feds do what they constitutionally are mandated to do and other than that shove as many things as possible( along funding to implement) down to the states. The top down approach does not always work well(it's one size fits all, is that the way your family buys it clothes) all states are different in needs, population, demographics, etc. doesn't it just make sense that a bottom up solution would work better. Policies would be tailored for a specific state and their peoples. In addition we would have 50 different laboratories trying different things to solve problems and states could share info and adapt their approach as to what is working elsewhere. Only to a lib is one size fits all a better policy. As this Administration has shown, large bureaucracies do not always function well. And when they fail, no one is to blame(as in the big spill in Colorado)Kinda hard to understand for a bumper sticker guy like you I know but there it is.

 

[DogBoyRy]

It doesn't really have one. Hence the need for the government. The market had decades to get more people insured. It mostly failed at this mission. Only when the government stepped in did we finally see major progress.

Pure Gold.
You always deliver.
Dem debate is free college, full paid time off for births (but you know sick kids are next - no fraud coming on this for sure), free childcare, free pre school, benefits for all (here legally or not), etc, etc. Free, free, free.
Voters read between the lines - we never even mentioned free phones before but just wait - free computers and cars are coming if you vote for us.
Repubs are more like this is a mess and we need to get government out of the way for people who create jobs, cut waste, etc.
Please explain the spending on fat lesbians, dumb animal studies ,etc, etc. that keep the colleges and universities hoping to get these dumb grants and spending.

 

[TJ8869]

That some how nullifies it?

No. But then your post did nothing to nullify or really even address my point anyway. I was just pointing out that both parties wholeheartedly embraced the Patriot Act for the benefit of Dems who like to pretend Republicans shoved it down our throats.

 

[Lone Clone]

Gee... I wonder why they picked 1935 as the start year for this chart?

In China, people are obligated by law to take care of their aging parents. I hate to use China as an example of anything done correctly, but there it is.

They make Volvos, which are really good cars.

 

[TJ8869]

Gee... I wonder why they picked 1935 as the start year for this chart?

It would be interesting to see what the chart looked like if it started in, for example, 1920 instead.

 

[22*43*51]

Speaking of the Patriot Act.

It's not called that anymore.

What did Obama rename it when he doubled down?

After he promise to repeal it, of course.

 

[22*43*51]

Don't really find it odd at all. The Republicans haven't had a new idea in years. They just keep clinging to their long disproven mantra of tax cuts for the rich, trickle down economics and deregulation of the private sector with the predictable disastrous results whenever they're tried.

That because those ideas have produced the greatest country and economy the world has ever seen.

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

that's because the free market is the solution

Free market sucks at it's job then.

 

[The Tradition]

We haven't had free markets in over 100 years.

 

[Huey Grey]

Pure Gold.
You always deliver.
Dem debate is free college, full paid time off for births (but you know sick kids are next - no fraud coming on this for sure), free childcare, free pre school, benefits for all (here legally or not), etc, etc. Free, free, free.
Voters read between the lines - we never even mentioned free phones before but just wait - free computers and cars are coming if you vote for us.
Repubs are more like this is a mess and we need to get government out of the way for people who create jobs, cut waste, etc.
Please explain the spending on fat lesbians, dumb animal studies ,etc, etc. that keep the colleges and universities hoping to get these dumb grants and spending.

It's strange that the Republican party now opposes education, healthcare, and equal rights yet think that they'll still make it to the White House. Odd strategy. Best of wishes to you guys winning on such an anti-populist message.

 

[Huey Grey]

Private markets? Evidently you were not listening or too stupid to understand what you we're hearing. But what they are saying Is let the Feds do what they constitutionally are mandated to do and other than that shove as many things as possible( along funding to implement) down to the states. The top down approach does not always work well(it's one size fits all, is that the way your family buys it clothes) all states are different in needs, population, demographics, etc. doesn't it just make sense that a bottom up solution would work better. Policies would be tailored for a specific state and their peoples. In addition we would have 50 different laboratories trying different things to solve problems and states could share info and adapt their approach as to what is working elsewhere. Only to a lib is one size fits all a better policy. As this Administration has shown, large bureaucracies do not always function well. And when they fail, no one is to blame(as in the big spill in Colorado)Kinda hard to understand for a bumper sticker guy like you I know but there it is.

So to get this straight. The Republican plan is let the states fix our problems? How does this change my original criticism that the GOP is running on a message that if you put them in the White House, they plan on sitting on their thumbs?

 

[Vroom_C14]

I find it disappointing that instead of giving actual details of how they will solve our problems, the Republicans simply bash the government and declare that somehow the problems will magically solve themselves. Not very reassuring talk from the people who will be put in charge.

And I disagree that the job of the President is to depend upon the market to relieve him of having to do any actual work.

Vs how the Dems bash the Reps, state they will spend away our problems and somehow the debt they rack up will just magically go away..

 

[Huey Grey]

Vs how the Dems bash the Reps, state they will spend away our problems and somehow the debt they rack up will just magically go away..

You realize that when it comes to deficits, the Dems come way closer to a balanced budget, right? If less debt is truly your goal, you should be celebrating whenever a Dem gets in office.

 

[The Tradition]

So to get this straight. The Republican plan is let the states fix our problems? How does this change my original criticism that the GOP is running on a message that if you put them in the White House, they plan on sitting on their thumbs?

Repealing laws and regulations, shifting responsibilities that should rightfully belong to the states, and reducing spending is not "sitting on thumbs".

It's funny, some people think "doing something" only means growing government.

 

[Vroom_C14]

 

[Huey Grey]

Repealing laws and regulations, shifting responsibilities that should rightfully belong to the states, and reducing spending is not "sitting on thumbs".

It's funny, some people think "doing something" only means growing government.

So their message is, "We will do less than nothing?"

Simply clearing the table for the states to solve our problems isn't a very reassuring message. To me, it's an admission that you have no idea how to solve them yourselves. How can individual states solve the wealth gap, Climate Change, regional water shortages, or any of the million problems that span state lines?

 

[MemorialRedWarrior]

So to get this straight. The Republican plan is let the states fix our problems? How does this change my original criticism that the GOP is running on a message that if you put them in the White House, they plan on sitting on their thumbs?

What problems are you so concerned about exactly?

 

[Vroom_C14]

You realize that when it comes to deficits, the Dems come way closer to a balanced budget, right? If less debt is truly your goal, you should be celebrating whenever a Dem gets in office.

POTUS R's have a -2.3 of GDP vs POTUS D's at -1.3

Democrat Bill Clinton was president the last time the federal budget was balanced, and Republicans controlled Congress.

Many factors beyond who happens to be the president go into balancing a budget. Whether Congress is unified under one cooperative party, the economic landscape, and the policies a president inherits from his predecessor can all have an effect. What’s more, many would say that the most important figure in economics is not the president or Congress, but the person who controls the size of the nation’s money supply–the Chairman of the Federal Reserve.

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

We haven't had free markets in over 100 years.

You mean we havn't had free markets since a time when children where routinely employed in completely unsafe conditions working 60 hours a week to try to feed their family whilst you had a small core of people who had more money then the US government and more power to boot??

Gee I wonder why that is.

 

[Huey Grey]

What problems are you so concerned about exactly?

I've stated many of them above. But let's examine the wealth gap since that seems to be an issue many are concerned about. How exactly do individual states solve this problem? It's not a problem isolated to just Michigan or Alabama. It's everywhere, which means that it would make a lot more sense to have the federal government step in instead of placing the burden entirely on each state to fix. It's also an issue that is well within the Constitutional authority of the federal government since it involves interstate commerce. So where were the GOP candidates saying that we need the federal government to fix income gaps?