American Politics

[SharkBait]

Increasing American military spending just puts us more in debt and takes away money that can be used for better things, like supporting the veterans or Americans. We shouldn't be focusing on increasing security abroad, we should be focused on minding our business. once we do that, I'm sure we'll stop being hated.

Reduce money put in defense, and increase taxes on rich people and big businesses. I'm sure businesses like Wal-Mart and Apple can afford taxes when they rake in millions from profits, and Wal-Mart is stingy about treating its employees well.


The president should focus more on fixing things that affect Americans. Allow abortion, fund Planned Parenthood, do something about student loans before America sinks irreversibly deep, and help those who need a push to get started.

Why tax businesses and people who have struggled to work up to be successful...that will hire students who graduate with debt, thereby decreasing how much students will earn and ultimately taxing them more once they are successful. It doesnt make sense. If youve become successful then you ought to be rewarded with having lessened tax burden. It only makes sense.

Military spending can be increased to be more of the budget while decreasing funding of things that are unnecessary. Rather than it being around 4% of GDP it needs to be at least 8% or more. The best offense is a strong defense with readily available modern and future tech empowered forces.

I dont see why things like planned parenthood need to be around. What have they done for me? Nothing. States ought to be able to decide how they want to handle health disparities and health education, not some entity. Worst yet supporting planned parenthood goes against held views of abortion. If states educated about pregnancies than abortion and other events could be avoided.

 

[M3J]

Why tax businesses and people who have struggled to work up to be successful...that will hire students who graduate with debt, thereby decreasing how much students will earn and ultimately taxing them more once they are successful. It doesnt make sense. If youve become successful then you ought to be rewarded with having lessened tax burden. It only makes sense.

How many people struggled to work up to be successful? Kinda odd that Bill Gates doesn't mind paying more taxes and donating money, but other wealthy people balk at the thought even though they can afford it. It should be proportionate to how much one earns per year, as I'm sure someone who makes over $200K can afford to help out the economy.

That creates an even bigger divide between upper class and middle class. Why should upper class pay less taxes when they can afford to pay more while middle class and lower have to shoulder the burden? It's not like the wealthy need billions of dollars to survive, right? They're already rewarded with having enough money to buy almost anything they want.

Military spending can be increased to be more of the budget while decreasing funding of things that are unnecessary. Rather than it being around 4% of GDP it needs to be at least 8% or more. The best offense is a strong defense with readily available modern and future tech empowered forces.

Increasing military spending is unnecessary. We're spending about $600 billion, and for what? That money can be used for something better like NASA or actually takin care of the American citizens rather than giving the weapon makers more money.

I dont see why things like planned parenthood need to be around. What have they done for me? Nothing. States ought to be able to decide how they want to handle health disparities and health education, not some entity. Worst yet supporting planned parenthood goes against held views of abortion. If states educated about pregnancies than abortion and other events could be avoided.

Quite a selfish view. Planned Parenthood helps others who need it, whether with learning about sex, getting protection, or whatever else. I don't like abortion, but pro choice is more important. It's the women's bodies, they should have the right to get an abortion if they want. Plus, it's not like safe sex prevents STDs or pregnancy 100% of the time.

For all the talk about saving souls and lives, I see a lot of conservatives oppose welfare and supporting kids. And despite spouting freedom and less interference from government, they also don't mind the government interfering to take away the freedom of things they're against, whether abortion or same sex marriage, despite them not being affected.

 

[SharkBait]

How many people struggled to work up to be successful? Kinda odd that Bill Gates doesn't mind paying more taxes and donating money, but other wealthy people balk at the thought even though they can afford it. It should be proportionate to how much one earns per year, as I'm sure someone who makes over $200K can afford to help out the economy.

That creates an even bigger divide between upper class and middle class. Why should upper class pay less taxes when they can afford to pay more while middle class and lower have to shoulder the burden? It's not like the wealthy need billions of dollars to survive, right? They're already rewarded with having enough money to buy almost anything they want.

That is too punishing. To make 200K, one can be just any normal family that graduated college and got a fairly decent job with their degree. 200K goes fast once they have kids, cars, insurances (since people put this president in office that wants people to pay more for insurance), homes, savings for retirements, etc, and also they are still paying for student loans & saving for their kids to go to school. Taxes are eating these peoples money away too. The percentage one pays to taxes ought to decrease as you make more.

Increasing military spending is unnecessary. We're spending about $600 billion, and for what? That money can be used for something better like NASA or actually takin care of the American citizens rather than giving the weapon makers more money.

Mr Obama decreased military spending but during that time also cut key NASA manned programs and the shuttle issue. Terrible move. We need more military to protect our borders. Id want a safe country not one spending on things that wont matter in times of war.

Quite a selfish view. Planned Parenthood helps others who need it, whether with learning about sex, getting protection, or whatever else. I don't like abortion, but pro choice is more important. It's the women's bodies, they should have the right to get an abortion if they want. Plus, it's not like safe sex prevents STDs or pregnancy 100% of the time.

For all the talk about saving souls and lives, I see a lot of conservatives oppose welfare and supporting kids. And despite spouting freedom and less interference from government, they also don't mind the government interfering to take away the freedom of things they're against, whether abortion or same sex marriage, despite them not being affected.

Everyone is affected when our money is being used for it. I dont see why one would assume planned parenthood is the only way to handle those things. I also think the abortion epidemic is harmful and giving people an excuse to make bad or unsmart decision that drives up the healthcare cost that puts a burden on everyone in the system.

 

[kkck]

Why tax businesses and people who have struggled to work up to be successful...that will hire students who graduate with debt, thereby decreasing how much students will earn and ultimately taxing them more once they are successful. It doesnt make sense. If youve become successful then you ought to be rewarded with having lessened tax burden. It only makes sense.

Military spending can be increased to be more of the budget while decreasing funding of things that are unnecessary. Rather than it being around 4% of GDP it needs to be at least 8% or more. The best offense is a strong defense with readily available modern and future tech empowered forces.

I dont see why things like planned parenthood need to be around. What have they done for me? Nothing. States ought to be able to decide how they want to handle health disparities and health education, not some entity. Worst yet supporting planned parenthood goes against held views of abortion. If states educated about pregnancies than abortion and other events could be avoided.

So... if you are not successful you are punished with a greater tax burden? That doesn't sound right, if anything it would aggravate the poverty thing. It really doesn't make sense for higher income folk to have a lesser burden than folk with lower incomes, its a situation where the system would be making poor people poorer and rich people richer.

That sounds incoherent with what is going on. The best offense is a strong defense? It's not like the US is defending its borders or anything, the enemies the US currently has literally cannot invade the US. The worst they can do is terrorism and for the most part even that is quite impossible to pull of currently.

What has it done for you? Doesn't that completely miss the point? If it hasn't done anything for you then great, lucky you. The issue would be the people it does something for, that is what you should be looking at. At a personal level I am not a fan of abortions (to me its a debate about when life starts rather than individual rights and I can't rationalize the amount of cells or organs or whatnot being the decisive factor here so to speak, not that I haven't tried), however the issue at the US is deeper than that. The very people who are against planned parenthood are also conservatives who propose abstinence only sex education. Which as a matter of fact has not worked in the past, currently does not work and will not work in the future. So the very people who are against planned parenthood are also directly responsible for every abortion happening there. If someone is going to be against abortions then the rational thing to do would be to at least teach people proven ways (not abstinence) to not get pregnant to begin with. And then provide the un-aborted babies and their families with every bit of help plausible so that their lives are not outright terrible.

 

[M3J]

That is too punishing. To make 200K, one can be just any normal family that graduated college and got a fairly decent job with their degree. 200K goes fast once they have kids, cars, insurances (since people put this president in office that wants people to pay more for insurance), homes, savings for retirements, etc, and also they are still paying for student loans & saving for their kids to go to school. Taxes are eating these peoples money away too. The percentage one pays to taxes ought to decrease as you make more.

Yet higher taxes on middle classes and lower isn't? The wealthy aren't being punished, they just act like they are because they're too selfish to give up wealth.

Not really, given student loans and how hard it is to find a job. The job market isn't good, and even if one finds a temporary job like in fast food or something, the pay usually sucks. I highly doubt $200K per year or more goes fast, despite Bush royally fucking up the economy. I see no reason why the percentage should go down just because one makes more money - it should go higher as it means they can afford it.

Bill Gates, despite wanting to pay higher taxes and donating money to good causes, is still one of the wealthiest people in the world. Why should the rich people get an easy life just for being rich while the poorer people have to work hard and shoulder all the burden? US would benefit more from increasing the taxes on the wealthy and most corporations and businesses than taking money from those who can't afford it.

Mr Obama decreased military spending but during that time also cut key NASA manned programs and the shuttle issue. Terrible move. We need more military to protect our borders. Id want a safe country not one spending on things that wont matter in times of war.

Always thought that was the Republicans who preferred to cut NASA spending. This and this article seem to agree.

Build higher walls and make it impossible to cross the border somehow. We don't need more military to protect our borders, it's not like we're in huge danger. If you want a safe country, then tell the government to stop interfering in other countries or training rebels who could turn against us.

Everyone is affected when our money is being used for it. I dont see why one would assume planned parenthood is the only way to handle those things. I also think the abortion epidemic is harmful and giving people an excuse to make bad or unsmart decision that drives up the healthcare cost that puts a burden on everyone in the system.

I think everyone agrees Planned Parenthood is one way to handle things. School is another, but it also depends on the parents who are willing to let their kids learn about sex. And I'd rather my money be used on something useful to society like Planned Parenthood over defense and stuffing the contractors' pockets. Why should my money be used to make defense contractors richer?

Doesn't give them an excuse to make bad decisions. I'm pretty sure women are not happy with the idea of killing fetuses, but it's their body. They have the right to get an abortion, and I frankly find 90% of the arguments against it dumb, and depending on their views on other stuff, hypocritical. If they can't support a child, why should they still be forced to give birth? MIght as well ban divorce too, because Jesus apparently does not like divorces.

TRUMP

If Trump wins, I will find you and beat you with a bat.

 

[SharkBait]

Always thought that was the Republicans who preferred to cut NASA spending. This and this article seem to agree.

Build higher walls and make it impossible to cross the border somehow. We don't need more military to protect our borders, it's not like we're in huge danger. If you want a safe country, then tell the government to stop interfering in other countries or training rebels who could turn against us.

But it was Mr Obama who cut the space shuttle program and the constellation program.

 

[xi0]

But it was Mr Obama who cut the space shuttle program and the constellation program.

The Space Shuttle program was originally going to be retired 15 years prior to when it actually was. It was kept afloat in an effort to complete the ISS and nothing more. So no, that's not true at all.

The Constellation program was cancelled for never producing anything. The program was started under George W. Bush's administration and led nowhere. More plans were made in the wake of it's cancellation and we've also seen a huge boom in the private sector in the way of manned spaceflights. Which is something that should be music to fiscally conservative ears. Also, Orion and the SLS are still under development at NASA.

 

[M3J]

But it was Mr Obama who cut the space shuttle program and the constellation program.

But it was the republicans who wanted massive cuts to the NASA budget. People keep attacking Obama for everything, but it was Bush who did the most damage.

 

[Machi-tan]

What? I'm voting for Donald Trump.

Race wars has always been a thing, even within my family haha. I'm so mixed people call me racially ambigious, i don't look like too much of one thing, but even within my own family there's someone from every side that has a rather sour view of someone of another side. It's toxic. It's getting better... but toxic still (Talking about America as a whole, not my family XD)

I honestly don't even know who to vote for. If we're being perfectly honest Donald Trump running for president is all news channels want to play. I honestly don't have the foggiest idea who can be considered viable.

So until i figure out who... I'm voting Trump.

 

[xi0]

What? I'm voting for Donald Trump.

Race wars has always been a thing, even within my family haha. I'm so mixed people call me racially ambigious, i don't look like too much of one thing, but even within my own family there's someone from every side that has a rather sour view of someone of another side. It's toxic. It's getting better... but toxic still (Talking about America as a whole, not my family XD)

I honestly don't even know who to vote for. If we're being perfectly honest Donald Trump running for president is all news channels want to play. I honestly don't have the foggiest idea who can be considered viable.

So until i figure out who... I'm voting Trump.

So you're going for the easiest option because you're ignorant to anything else?

...that sounds a bit off doesn't it?

 

[SharkBait]

I personally would rather funding for space stuff go to private companies until we have a budget surplus. I was just bringing that up earlier as Obama's administration is inhibiting US from being at the forefront of the Space Race of the modern times. I dont understand how a manned mission to other places can happen in the timeframe he desires with the funding situation at hand (especially with money flowing out to support healthcare that people dont want or care about).

But it was the republicans who wanted massive cuts to the NASA budget. People keep attacking Obama for everything, but it was Bush who did the most damage.

Bush didnt do any damage, he had my ideal for what the government and military ought to be. No one can predict how long a war can be and no one can predict how long it can be to try to build a country from the brink of destruction and change its entire government and train people. Enduring freedom while crushing evil terrorists is the best sstrategy for protecting american interests away and abroad. Look at how many new people come from overseas and back here to do terrorist attacks here and the news of ones that are barely stopped or halted due to perfect mistakes happening.

 

[Machi-tan]

But it was the republicans who wanted massive cuts to the NASA budget. People keep attacking Obama for everything, but it was Bush who did the most damage.

You win the internet. You won't believe how many people still to this DAY in the south hate obama for making gay marriage a thing. When it was a supreme court Decision. I know Obama openly endorsed it, but there are so many angry conservative families against it. I visited my Grandmother who is old fashion, and went to church with her. The amount of hate they had for Obama 'single handedly' changing the definition of marriage is terrifying.

And if you try to explain to them that the country is almost 50/50 on the issue and it was a supreme court thing, then you're just being a know it all.

---------- Post added at 07:00 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:59 PM ----------

So you're going for the easiest option because you're ignorant to anything else?

...that sounds a bit off doesn't it?

It was a joke haha, I'm not voting for Trump, God no. XD

---------- Post added at 07:01 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:00 PM ----------

Granted, sarcasm is hard to convey via text. But i haven't the foggiest who i prefer is what i ment to say. I know of the competitors but Trump is making such a stink with his skillful debates (Sarcasm) that i have a hard time deciding

 

[SharkBait]

Mr Trump has the issue of no clear Tax Plan and no clear knowledge of Foreign Policy. I also have fear of what type of people would a Trump Administration be filled with?

 

[xi0]

Bush didnt do any damage, he had my ideal for what the government and military ought to be. No one can predict how long a war can be and no one can predict how long it can be to try to build a country from the brink of destruction and change its entire government and train people. Enduring freedom while crushing evil terrorists is the best sstrategy for protecting american interests away and abroad. Look at how many new people come from overseas and back here to do terrorist attacks here and the news of ones that are barely stopped or halted due to perfect mistakes happening.

I think the actual conservative viewpoint on such a thing is that we should have nothing to do with doing that in the first place, especially when it came to Iraq. It's always a bit perplexing to see "conservatives" be more willing to spend money on blasting a country back to the stone age and rebuilding it rather than improving our own infrastructure on a broad scale. But hey, I guess it isn't as profitable to them...

 

[Machi-tan]

Trump has no game plan at all. Common people love him because he is a common person. One with money, and a below average intelligence who says offensive things about US allies in passing. If he becomes our president I'm nearly 90% sure that foreign policy would belly up because in the paraphrased words of our best cannidate 2015:

Best way to deal with Mexican immigrants is to build a great wall at the border... *sigh*

-Attack on Titan music plays-

 

[SharkBait]

I think the actual conservative viewpoint on such a thing is that we should have nothing to do with doing that in the first place, especially when it came to Iraq. It's always a bit perplexing to see "conservatives" be more willing to spend money on blasting a country back to the stona age and rebuilding it rather than improving our own infrastructure on a broad scale. But hey, I guess it isn't as profitable to them...

Conservatives? most Americans supported war against Terrorist countries. And they still do (also notice "on foot" soldiers, like I said, greatly expanding conventional forces is needed, not just drones)

What other alternative is there? What would building our windmill power system benefit us in terms of homeland security? I cant think of anything beyond being more targets for terrorists to attack. The day is coming when even out power grid could be targetted by terrorists as well as other nations. Hitting terrorists at the source is the best plan of attack.

 

[xi0]

Conservatives? most Americans supported war against Terrorist countries. And they still do (also notice "on foot" soldiers, like I said, greatly expanding conventional forces is needed, not just drones)

What other alternative is there? What would building our windmill power system benefit us in terms of homeland security? I cant think of anything beyond being more targets for terrorists to attack. The day is coming when even out power grid could be targetted by terrorists as well as other nations. Hitting terrorists at the source is the best plan of attack.

Well shit, many democrats supported the action at the time as well. That wasn't my point. A true conservative foreign policy is to be AGAINST invading other countries and violating their sovereignty, especially when the reasons for doing so are faulty at best, if not out-right lies. I mean, this fits right inline with Bush and the NeoCon movement in general. It's not a conservative stance at all.

The action of unilaterally invading another country has created just as much problems for us. You do know we funded Bin Laden back in the 80s when he was a part of the mujahideen right?. We trained the Iraqi military, and what good did they do against ISIS and our interests? Why has ISIS been so successful? It's due to the power vacuum WE CREATED. The equipment we gave them was repeatedly used against us. The entire operation over there has been a gigantic waste of time, money, and human life (on both sides).

I fail to see how invading other countries is the best course of action against fighting cybercrime, so...

 

[SharkBait]

Well shit, many democrats supported the action at the time as well. That wasn't my point. A true conservative foreign policy is to be AGAINST invading other countries and violating their sovereignty, especially when the reasons for doing so are faulty at best, if not out-right lies. I mean, this fits right inline with Bush and the NeoCon movement in general. It's not a conservative stance at all.

The action of unilaterally invading another country has created just as much problems for us. You do know we funded Bin Laden back in the 80s when he was a part of the mujahideen right?. We trained the Iraqi military, and what good did they do against ISIS and our interests? Why has ISIS been so successful? It's due to the power vacuum WE CREATED. The equipment we gave them was repeatedly used against us. The entire operation over there has been a gigantic waste of time, money, and human life (on both sides).

I fail to see how invading other countries is the best course of action against fighting cybercrime, so...

Just because people have weapons doesnt mean they can be successful. Countries and leaders are allowing ISIS and other terrorist groups to have safe haven in their countries, while those countries, due to Obama's over reliance of drones and lack of having soldiers on foot in those places and necessary support installations, dont allow much US forces into their countries to eliminate terrorists.

Why would you let another countries sovereignty continue to exist when it threatens your own citizens safety? That seems like bad leadership.

 

[Machi-tan]

No one wins when it comes to that type of debate. If we went in, people would complain. If we turn a blind eye. People would complain. If we talked about it, people would complain.

There is little a leader can do for it to be accepted by all as 'good'. Leaders are never 'good', they are only less 'bad' than the last one.

That's the one thing American politics makes clear.

 

[xi0]

Why would you let another countries sovereignty continue to exist when it threatens your own citizens safety? That seems like bad leadership.

How did Iraq threaten our safety? There was no link between Hussein and al-Qaeda, the 9/11 Commission report among many others support this. Saddam Hussein was a Ba'athist and Bin Laden hated him for that. Bin Laden supported anti-Hussein forces within Iraqi Kurdistan and even sought to fight against Iraqi forces when they invaded Kuwait back in 1990. Political Islamism was only a factor within Iraq AFTER we invaded it.