NationStates Jolt Archive

I notice we can't swing a dead cat around without hitting someone who we disagree with. Let's see what MOST of us agree with, no matter what side of the political spectrum we're on.

MOST of us agree that killing is wrong. MOST of us wouldn't pick up a gun and kill someone because they looked at us strangely.

MOST of us like freedom of speech. We all have our opinions and most of us like stating them.

MOST of us wouldn't steal from others. We wouldn't break into a person's home and take their surround sound system. (Copyright laws excluded for obvious reasons)

And I'm sure NONE of us like being abused for what we are, or what we believe in.

I am going to say this. I am a far left socialist. That's just me. We have people from all political ideals on NS from the non-practicing Taoist lefties like me (ok, I'm probably the only one), to the religious right-wingers. That's fine. However who am I addressing next is not the far-right religious men and women. I can't persuade them because they are very stuck in their beliefs. That's fine. Who I am addressing is the Republican voters in America, Labour voters in England and the Liberal voters in Australia, who do care about the environment and who do believe women should be payed the same as men.

Yes they exist. They seem to lean towards the left on issues that we agree with, yet they vote Republican, Liberal or Labour. First I have to admit that we, the left-wing, aren't always 100% right all the time. I must admit I consider Jesse Jackson to be a hypocrite. We probably shouldn't be smoking marijuana (though it should be legalised - I'll come back to that one later). Some unions are absolutley terrible and need to get their act together. A fair few shows on MTV are crap (with the exception of Daria). Bill O' Reilly does make some good points (anti-death penalty, anti-NAFTA and children adovocate) even though he's an idiot. And sometimes we do take political correctness too far. We're human and we make mistakes, just like you.

However we do have many good points which I think you should support, not because I'm a bleeding-heart socialist but because it will benefit you. Gay rights is good for you. You want more gay men and women. You want marriages taken place between them. Because if more gay men and women are married, then the more straight men and women for you. Think about it.

Abortions are good for you. Think about child-care. How many of your wasted tax dollars have gone into child-care programs when it could have been avoided by an abortion?

War in Iraq is not good for you. It costs BILLIONS and BILLIONS of dollars to fund a war. Aren't you always complaining that the left-wing parties would waste your tax dollars? Yet how much does it cost to arm a platoon, fly them over to Iraq, by their bullets, pay for their night-vision and hi-tech gear, keep fuel in the vehicles and pay for bombs? When it is added up, the cost of a war is enormous. Yet that money could go and give people higher wages.

Higher wages is very good for you. If someone makes $80 000 (US) a year, then what is the likelyhood of them breaking into your home and stealing your stuff? I can safely say the chances of that happening is nil.

Stopping the war on drugs is good for you. Hundreds of thousands of people are being put into prison for holding marijuana, a drug that is less debilating than a good dose of alcohol, on them. What funds the prisons? Your tax dollars. It costs $25 000 (US) a year to lock up a person who uses marijuana. It costs a whole lot less than that to provide a re-hab program (round about $3000 US min. $14 000 US max.) And not to mention the extra costs for paying the air fee of SWAT members to bust some scumbag in Columbia. If it is legalised taxes will drop, the economy will boom (Americans spend over $50 000 000 000 on illegal drugs alone), and therefore drugs will become cheap and cost effective, so no one will sell your car stereo for a fix.

I just want people who vote Republican, Labour or Liberal to think about that. I want you to seriously consider that and see if you can understand where I am coming from.

about the same orientaition as the Democrats in America. Their liberal on social issues and fiscal moderate. It's only on Iraq that they're conservative. Even then, it's only Tony Blair who is a Bushist stooge. There are plenty of Labour members very unhappy with Blair about Iraq. The Conservatives are more the Republicans or Britain.

Higher wages is very good for you. If someone makes $80 000 (US) a year, then what is the likelyhood of them breaking into your home and stealing your stuff? I can safely say the chances of that happening is nil.

Not only that, higher wages means people have more disposable income that they can use to purchase goods, which means more business and more profit. Plus higher wages means there is more money that can be taxed.

HOWEVER, it is not all peaches and cream, it sends inflation up shrinking savings.

Well, i am republican.. and i do lean left on certain issues.. and i know the points your TRYING to make.. there is just no connection..

your saying most of us agree killing is wrong, but ur trying to tell me how abortion is good.. because it saves me money ? I would rather save money by cutting welfare programs and put it into childcare then kill a fetus.. that is just a philophical qusetion.. I would spend twice what we would normally spend on childcare if we could stop the killings, and stop women from thinking they have the right to termiante someone elses life! (something all pro-life republicans belive)

I agree we should stop the war on drugs, because we've obviously lost when children can get whatever they want when they want at a cheap price.

im not for everyone getin 80k a year.. because Im a caplitalist.. and there is such a thing as inflation. we all make 80k a year we are all spending twice that to survive. THen companies cant face with global compeition and our economy suffers..

And yes the war in Iraq costs alot.. but if 100's of billions and 5 - 10 years of unrest can give more stablity to the middle east.. its a small price to pay. yes there are no WMD, yes the intelegence was wrong.. but removing sadam was worth it all, and we finally show deviants who abuse the UN you can't continue to snub UN resolutions, even if the UN itself dosn't want to enforce them (nice and controversial for you ~_^)

There are plenty of instances where people with no education, poor backgrounds, even in minority races succeed when they want to. I would rather put my tax dollars to better use then the travesty of a welfare program we run today. And social security is a joke! Im paying into a program i will never benifit from, and one all economist agree wil collapse without change, costing us another 10 trillion dollars.

Ill start voting democratic when democrats start bringing up canidates that really reflect the demeanor of american society, and encompass atleast SOME of my ideals... something i think you will see soon, as the democratic party clearly is failing and has to regoranize its base

Not only that, higher wages means people have more disposable income that they can use to purchase goods, which means more business and more profit. Plus higher wages means there is more money that can be taxed.

HOWEVER, it is not all peaches and cream, it sends inflation up shrinking savings.
It also sometimes forces businesses to pay their employees more than they can afford.

about the same orientaition as the Democrats in America. Their liberal on social issues and fiscal moderate. It's only on Iraq that they're conservative. Even then, it's only Tony Blair who is a Bushist stooge. There are plenty of Labour members very unhappy with Blair about Iraq. The Conservatives are more the Republicans or Britain.

Both the American Democrats and British Labour are centrist to right (taking into account that there are mainstream parties that are more right-wing). There are hardly any countries with even center-left major parties.

Not only that, higher wages means people have more disposable income that they can use to purchase goods, which means more business and more profit. Plus higher wages means there is more money that can be taxed.

HOWEVER, it is not all peaches and cream, it sends inflation up shrinking savings.

things simply are not this simple.. higher wages means companies have to charge more for their products, and cost of living sky rockets, not to metion inflation.. IT is not in America's culture to save money, if we were paid more.. we would only look to spend more.. not that we would beable to becuase of inflation.. you can get those kind of wages.. you have to work for them though..

My friend right out of college gets paid almost as much as an accountant.. but i dont want to work 17 hours a day 75 hours a week to get it.. even if in 3 years he will be exceeding 100k.. i would rather get paid 50k or 40k and work more reasonable hours. If you want money in this country,, you can get it.. you jsut have to work for it! only in America you can get what you want if your willig to go the extra mile

Well, i am republican.. and i do lean left on certain issues.. and i know the points your TRYING to make.. there is just no connection..

your saying most of us agree killing is wrong, but ur trying to tell me how abortion is good.. because it saves me money ? I would rather save money by cutting welfare programs and put it into childcare then kill a fetus.. that is just a philophical qusetion.. I would spend twice what we would normally spend on childcare if we could stop the killings, and stop women from thinking they have the right to termiante someone elses life! (something all pro-life republicans belive)

I agree we should stop the war on drugs, because we've obviously lost when children can get whatever they want when they want at a cheap price.

im not for everyone getin 80k a year.. because Im a caplitalist.. and there is such a thing as inflation. we all make 80k a year we are all spending twice that to survive. THen companies cant face with global compeition and our economy suffers..

And yes the war in Iraq costs alot.. but if 100's of billions and 5 - 10 years of unrest can give more stablity to the middle east.. its a small price to pay. yes there are no WMD, yes the intelegence was wrong.. but removing sadam was worth it all, and we finally show deviants who abuse the UN you can't continue to snub UN resolutions, even if the UN itself dosn't want to enforce them (nice and controversial for you ~_^)

There are plenty of instances where people with no education, poor backgrounds, even in minority races succeed when they want to. I would rather put my tax dollars to better use then the travesty of a welfare program we run today. And social security is a joke! Im paying into a program i will never benifit from, and one all economist agree wil collapse without change, costing us another 10 trillion dollars.

Ill start voting democratic when democrats start bringing up canidates that really reflect the demeanor of american society, and encompass atleast SOME of my ideals... something i think you will see soon, as the democratic party clearly is failing and has to regoranize its base

that the tens of thousands of innocent people the U.S. has killed in Iraq might not view "getting Saddam as worth it all"? Just asking.

I notice we can't swing a dead cat around without hitting someone who we disagree with. Let's see what MOST of us agree with, no matter what side of the political spectrum we're on.

MOST of us agree that killing is wrong. MOST of us wouldn't pick up a gun and kill someone because they looked at us strangely.

MOST of us like freedom of speech. We all have our opinions and most of us like stating them.

MOST of us wouldn't steal from others. We wouldn't break into a person's home and take their surround sound system. (Copyright laws excluded for obvious reasons)

And I'm sure NONE of us like being abused for what we are, or what we believe in.

I am going to say this. I am a far left socialist. That's just me. We have people from all political ideals on NS from the non-practicing Taoist lefties like me (ok, I'm probably the only one), to the religious right-wingers. That's fine. However who am I addressing next is not the far-right religious men and women. I can't persuade them because they are very stuck in their beliefs. That's fine. Who I am addressing is the Republican voters in America, Labour voters in England and the Liberal voters in Australia, who do care about the environment and who do believe women should be payed the same as men.

Yes they exist. They seem to lean towards the left on issues that we agree with, yet they vote Republican, Liberal or Labour. First I have to admit that we, the left-wing, aren't always 100% right all the time. I must admit I consider Jesse Jackson to be a hypocrite. We probably shouldn't be smoking marijuana (though it should be legalised - I'll come back to that one later). Some unions are absolutley terrible and need to get their act together. A fair few shows on MTV are crap (with the exception of Daria). Bill O' Reilly does make some good points (anti-death penalty, anti-NAFTA and children adovocate) even though he's an idiot. And sometimes we do take political correctness too far. We're human and we make mistakes, just like you.

However we do have many good points which I think you should support, not because I'm a bleeding-heart socialist but because it will benefit you. Gay rights is good for you. You want more gay men and women. You want marriages taken place between them. Because if more gay men and women are married, then the more straight men and women for you. Think about it.

Abortions are good for you. Think about child-care. How many of your wasted tax dollars have gone into child-care programs when it could have been avoided by an abortion?

War in Iraq is not good for you. It costs BILLIONS and BILLIONS of dollars to fund a war. Aren't you always complaining that the left-wing parties would waste your tax dollars? Yet how much does it cost to arm a platoon, fly them over to Iraq, by their bullets, pay for their night-vision and hi-tech gear, keep fuel in the vehicles and pay for bombs? When it is added up, the cost of a war is enormous. Yet that money could go and give people higher wages.

Higher wages is very good for you. If someone makes $80 000 (US) a year, then what is the likelyhood of them breaking into your home and stealing your stuff? I can safely say the chances of that happening is nil.

Stopping the war on drugs is good for you. Hundreds of thousands of people are being put into prison for holding marijuana, a drug that is less debilating than a good dose of alcohol, on them. What funds the prisons? Your tax dollars. It costs $25 000 (US) a year to lock up a person who uses marijuana. It costs a whole lot less than that to provide a re-hab program (round about $3000 US min. $14 000 US max.) And not to mention the extra costs for paying the air fee of SWAT members to bust some scumbag in Columbia. If it is legalised taxes will drop, the economy will boom (Americans spend over $50 000 000 000 on illegal drugs alone), and therefore drugs will become cheap and cost effective, so no one will sell your car stereo for a fix.

I just want people who vote Republican, Labour or Liberal to think about that. I want you to seriously consider that and see if you can understand where I am coming from.

I can't say I agree with everything in this post, but it's incredibly refreshing to see something like this. Apparently someone still remembers that conservatives are just as intelligent as their liberal counterparts and just as willing to listen to reasoned arguments, and is addressing them as such.

that the tens of thousands of innocent people the U.S. has killed in Iraq might not view "getting Saddam as worth it all"? Just asking.

Is it Americans goign out purposfully targeting Iraqi's... i think there are more forces at work then just US occupation. Perhaps they might say now no its not worth it, because we are facing war and death.. but in 10 years.. when the insurgency is squashed.. and a democratic state institutied.. (whatever the form) .. they may sing another tune, as the other option would have been Sadams sons.. thought to be worse them sadamn himself. Perhaps they would not have said that if this invasion occured right after Sadam gased his own people.. its about timing and perspective..

Gay rights is good for you. You want more gay men and women. You want marriages taken place between them. Because if more gay men and women are married, then the more straight men and women for you. Think about it.

Abortions are good for you. Think about child-care. How many of your wasted tax dollars have gone into child-care programs when it could have been avoided by an abortion?

War in Iraq is not good for you. It costs BILLIONS and BILLIONS of dollars to fund a war. Aren't you always complaining that the left-wing parties would waste your tax dollars? Yet how much does it cost to arm a platoon, fly them over to Iraq, by their bullets, pay for their night-vision and hi-tech gear, keep fuel in the vehicles and pay for bombs? When it is added up, the cost of a war is enormous. Yet that money could go and give people higher wages.

Higher wages is very good for you. If someone makes $80 000 (US) a year, then what is the likelyhood of them breaking into your home and stealing your stuff? I can safely say the chances of that happening is nil.

Stopping the war on drugs is good for you. Hundreds of thousands of people are being put into prison for holding marijuana, a drug that is less debilating than a good dose of alcohol, on them. What funds the prisons? Your tax dollars. It costs $25 000 (US) a year to lock up a person who uses marijuana. It costs a whole lot less than that to provide a re-hab program (round about $3000 US min. $14 000 US max.) And not to mention the extra costs for paying the air fee of SWAT members to bust some scumbag in Columbia. If it is legalised taxes will drop, the economy will boom (Americans spend over $50 000 000 000 on illegal drugs alone), and therefore drugs will become cheap and cost effective, so no one will sell your car stereo for a fix.


The unfortunate problem with your excellent arguments is that they are completely divorced at least from the democratic party in the United States, whose candidates, officeholders, pundits, and supporters vary widely from those unimpeachable positions.

Democratic candidates and those of the republican party consistently oppose gay rights and marriage or try to pass off some kind of wimpy "civil union" whose status is inferior, trolling for moderate votes and mooning the 14th amendment's equal protection clause.

Many Democratic candidates and those of the republican party consistently oppose the right to an abortion, or else propose to forcibly confiscate the public's hard-earned money to abort the kids.

Most Democratic candidates and those of the republican party consistently affirm the eminent correct nature of the conflict in iraq, and with the exception of the well-meaning but untenable Dennis Kucinich propose to keep us in that nightmare, pour money into it, and refuse to take our troops out of that third-world hellhole or their vacuum pumps out of our pockets.

Despite all the good reasons to end the nightmare of drug prohibition, most Democratic candidates and those of the republican party consistently affirm the inevitability of the war and refuse to even examine let alone address the possibility of decriminalizing marijuana (forget legalization) while admitting their own "youthful indiscretions."

It is these type of examples that have driven me to abscond completely from the two-party treadmill and get my votes and money into the third parties, whose candidates may not win but whose policies I can contemplate without nausea. Indeed, I feel that the attempt to garner servicable public policy from either major policy is a futile endeavour, one whose pursuit is the real waste of your vote. I am particularly pleased with the policies and impressive but modest electoral success of the Libertarian party.

www.lp.org
www.harrybrowne.org

Well, i am republican.. and i do lean left on certain issues.. and i know the points your TRYING to make.. there is just no connection..

your saying most of us agree killing is wrong, but ur trying to tell me how abortion is good.. because it saves me money ? I would rather save money by cutting welfare programs and put it into childcare then kill a fetus.. that is just a philophical qusetion.. I would spend twice what we would normally spend on childcare if we could stop the killings, and stop women from thinking they have the right to termiante someone elses life! (something all pro-life republicans belive)

Depends on your view of when life begins. Some of these issues I can't persuade people on, but it's your view, so only you can change it. I'm just giving you something to think about.

I agree we should stop the war on drugs, because we've obviously lost when children can get whatever they want when they want at a cheap price.

I'm glad you agree. Not really for the right reasons, but it's a start.

im not for everyone getin 80k a year.. because Im a caplitalist.. and there is such a thing as inflation. we all make 80k a year we are all spending twice that to survive. THen companies cant face with global compeition and our economy suffers..

Hey I'm not saying everyone has to earn $80 000 a year. I'm saying that people should be making at least that so they won't have to steal your DVD player.

And yes the war in Iraq costs alot.. but if 100's of billions and 5 - 10 years of unrest can give more stablity to the middle east.. its a small price to pay. yes there are no WMD, yes the intelegence was wrong.. but removing sadam was worth it all, and we finally show deviants who abuse the UN you can't continue to snub UN resolutions, even if the UN itself dosn't want to enforce them (nice and controversial for you ~_^)

I take it you don't like certain members of the UN. But how is anyone worth billions of dollars to remove from one country? You aren't seeing it that Saddam is a low-life who wasn't worth your time and your money. Your tax dollars aren't going to bring balance to the middle-east. It may bring slight peace to a part of it after many, many years of work but you have started a war that you cannot win. The middle-east still has mass unrest in Iran, Afghanistan, Palistine and Israel. It's not our war to fight and it costs far too much money.

There are plenty of instances where people with no education, poor backgrounds, even in minority races succeed when they want to. I would rather put my tax dollars to better use then the travesty of a welfare program we run today. And social security is a joke! Im paying into a program i will never benifit from, and one all economist agree wil collapse without change, costing us another 10 trillion dollars.

Thank Clinton and Bush for that. I'm not saying that the welfare system in America is good. It's horrible. People need to change it, I agree with you. Vote for the person who will change it. I don't think a Republican can change it because they are to content on wasting your tax dollars on the Iraq war at the moment.

Ill start voting democratic when democrats start bringing up canidates that really reflect the demeanor of american society, and encompass atleast SOME of my ideals... something i think you will see soon, as the democratic party clearly is failing and has to regoranize its base

You are right. The Democrat Party does need to reorganise itself. But I did not say vote Democrat. Vote for whoever you want, I'm just trying to accept some of my views so it will benefit you.

Is it Americans goign out purposfully targeting Iraqi's... i think there are more forces at work then just US occupation. Perhaps they might say now no its not worth it, because we are facing war and death.. but in 10 years.. when the insurgency is squashed.. and a democratic state institutied.. (whatever the form) .. they may sing another tune, as the other option would have been Sadams sons.. thought to be worse them sadamn himself. Perhaps they would not have said that if this invasion occured right after Sadam gased his own people.. its about timing and perspective..

That's right, I forgot; you have to call them "insurgents". Makes them easier to kill. If you call them "rebels", then all of a sudden, they're brave, patriotic people defending their homeland against an illegal invasion. Can't have that.

And if innocent Iraqis are being killed, it's not the 140,000 Americans; it's the 23 Poles. Or the 17 Japanese. Or the 4 Solomon Islanders. Yep, it can't be us.