|
Post by tea4me on Jul 20, 2011 10:26:36 GMT -5
Is it selfish of me to vote for someone that "claims" to be against tax increases, simply because I do not want my taxes to increase?
That would mean less funding for schools and cuts to entitlement programs.
Do you vote for your own special interest?
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,479
|
Post by billisonboard on Jul 20, 2011 10:53:01 GMT -5
|
|
reasonfreedom
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 8:50:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,722
|
Post by reasonfreedom on Jul 20, 2011 10:55:03 GMT -5
ROFLMAO, nice joke billis.
|
|
dancinmama
Senior Associate
LIVIN' THE DREAM!!
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 20:49:45 GMT -5
Posts: 10,659
|
Post by dancinmama on Jul 20, 2011 10:55:10 GMT -5
I would be more than happy to vote for bond initiatives, tax increases, etc. (and I am a fiscal conservative) IF I thought that the government would/could manage my hard-earned money efficiently/effectively; unfortunately, that is not the case.
Our elected officials do not have to EARN the money that they so easily piss away. No one is really held accountable (okay, maybe some were in 2008). Look how many elected officials for years and years in the past have moved on (from public office), are now receiving a great pension, and have left the American people holding the bag!!
When I hear these idiots talking about how the American government has to start acting like the typical American family who sit around the kitchen table working out their budget, it makes me SICK. The American family cannot easily manipulate their income and debt like the government can.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Jul 20, 2011 11:07:25 GMT -5
I believe it's both selfish and short-sighted. As to the government not handling your money the way you think they should, dancinmama, who voted those politicians into office? For that matter, who can vote them out?
|
|
reasonfreedom
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 8:50:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,722
|
Post by reasonfreedom on Jul 20, 2011 11:28:14 GMT -5
I believe it's both selfish and short-sighted. As to the government not handling your money the way you think they should, dancinmama, who voted those politicians into office? For that matter, who can vote them out? Come on selfish? I guess it is selfish for you to want to eat something that your body doesn't need? People vote for politicians that would best improve their life style, that is the whole point of voting. That is in no way selfish and if it is then all people should give everything that is not a necessity to live to people that don't have them. For example sell your car(because you can use a bike to get to work even though you have to wake up 2 hours early), don't by icecream because your body doesn't need it, sell your t.v. because you don't need it, sell any sort of game you have because you don't need it. I think people need to look at themselves and what they have before they use the word selfish.
|
|
dancinmama
Senior Associate
LIVIN' THE DREAM!!
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 20:49:45 GMT -5
Posts: 10,659
|
Post by dancinmama on Jul 20, 2011 11:35:00 GMT -5
I believe it's both selfish and short-sighted. As to the government not handling your money the way you think they should, dancinmama, who voted those politicians into office? For that matter, who can vote them out? I'm not sure I understand what your point is. Obviously politicians from both sides of the aisle are to blame. I live in Nancy Pelosi country. I did not vote for her and I think she has been a total disaster in terms of prudent federal spending (both in the Bush and Obama administrations). I'm not happy with politicians that spend like drunken sailors and then do not take responsibility for their votes (i.e. Democrats that voted for the Iraq/Afghanistan wars yet are now screaming about how the money was allocated, but was not "paid for" in terms of incoming revenue). I am not happy with Obama's stimulus package that has been a complete and total failure in terms of jobs saved/created vs the amount of money that "had to be spent" promising an unemployment rate of no more than 8% when we are now at 9.2%. I am not happy that this administration is talking about being like the typical American family sitting around the kitchen table working out their budget. Where is Obama's budget? And if the Republicans gain control of the federal government and continue spending recklessly, I will be EQUALLY critical of them. The government needs to stop pissing away our money.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Jul 20, 2011 11:42:11 GMT -5
The only way we're going to stop the government from spending our money recklessly is to replace those who do so with those who won't. That's my point, and it's one heck of a lot easier said than done. There are things that will help ... like term limits ... but there's no one fix. In the meantime, each individual voting as though the entire world consists of their home and yard isn't going to help, either.
|
|
reasonfreedom
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 8:50:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,722
|
Post by reasonfreedom on Jul 20, 2011 11:47:37 GMT -5
I believe it's both selfish and short-sighted. As to the government not handling your money the way you think they should, dancinmama, who voted those politicians into office? For that matter, who can vote them out? I'm not sure I understand what your point is. Obviously politicians from both sides of the aisle are to blame. I live in Nancy Pelosi country. I did not vote for her and I think she has been a total disaster in terms of prudent federal spending (both in the Bush and Obama administrations). I'm not happy with politicians that spend like drunken sailors and then do not take responsibility for their votes (i.e. Democrats that voted for the Iraq/Afghanistan wars yet are now screaming about how the money was allocated, but was not "paid for" in terms of incoming revenue). I am not happy with Obama's stimulus package that has been a complete and total failure in terms of jobs saved/created vs the amount of money that "had to be spent" promising an unemployment rate of no more than 8% when we are now at 9.2%. I am not happy that this administration is talking about being like the typical American family sitting around the kitchen table working out their budget. Where is Obama's budget? And if the Republicans gain control of the federal government and continue spending recklessly, I will be EQUALLY critical of them. The government needs to stop pissing away our money. That or they can just stop taxing us so we can spend the money the way we want to. I think it would be better that we get all of our money back and then have community meetings and support our community through donations of what we earn for public services. Yeah, it is kind of like taxes except the whole community has a valid say in it and not just one representative that received the most votes at the time.
|
|
reasonfreedom
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 8:50:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,722
|
Post by reasonfreedom on Jul 20, 2011 11:49:52 GMT -5
The only way we're going to stop the government from spending our money recklessly is to replace those who do so with those who won't. That's my point, and it's one heck of a lot easier said than done. There are things that will help ... like term limits ... but there's no one fix. In the meantime, each individual voting as though the entire world consists of their home and yard isn't going to help, either. Yeah, another problem I see is that average voter is not smart enough to know what is best for themselves let alone to be judging what is best for everybody. So in that case, how do you vote and what should your vote be based on?
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Jul 20, 2011 11:53:52 GMT -5
I don't think of others as all that stupid, reasonfreedom. Your mileage may vary. I do believe people have different priorities, different reasoning, different ideas, and different goals. I also believe that to serve the good of the whole is the best way to achieve good for the individual. Again, you may see things differently.
|
|
Driftr
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 10, 2011 13:08:15 GMT -5
Posts: 3,478
|
Post by Driftr on Jul 20, 2011 11:58:26 GMT -5
I voted against the recent bond initiative for our local school district because when I looked at the details I saw allocations for new drill team uniforms, a new scoreboard for a couple football stadiums, and other miscellaneous garbage that has no business (IMO) in a bond offering. I have one child currently attending school in the district and another that'll be in K a little over a year from now. My wife made me promise not to bring it up with any of the parents of our eldests friends. A promise I grudgingly made because 'a happy wife is a happy life'.
The initiative passed like 75/25. It's for the kids...Bleh!
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Jul 20, 2011 12:03:49 GMT -5
I hear you, Driftr. Too many people don't actually read the bills and bond initiatives for which they're voting. They just skim the synopsis, tell themselves "it's for the kids", and tick the little box. It's sad, really.
|
|
reasonfreedom
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 8:50:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,722
|
Post by reasonfreedom on Jul 20, 2011 12:20:31 GMT -5
I don't think of others as all that stupid, reasonfreedom. Your mileage may vary. I do believe people have different priorities, different reasoning, different ideas, and different goals. I also believe that to serve the good of the whole is the best way to achieve good for the individual. Again, you may see things differently. How do you know what is good for the whole if you don't know what is good for the individual? Shouldn't it be the other way around? Like I said most people don't even know what is good for themselves, how can you even think they would know what is good for the whole? Look at the average obesity rate from 20 to 30% in the U.S. and you think people should know what is good for the whole, so that it in turn makes good for them? That logic is throwing me for a loop.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 2:17:01 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2011 12:22:16 GMT -5
I would be more than happy to vote for bond initiatives, tax increases, etc. (and I am a fiscal conservative) IF I thought that the government would/could manage my hard-earned money efficiently/effectively; unfortunately, that is not the case.
Dancinmama is sadly dead on in the above statement.
In dealing with normal household finances you basically have 2 choices about money. 1. Make more or 2. Cut spending. In the instance of our government only one applies....cut spending. That's because you can look back & see that both parties spend more than the American people give them & they do it every year. They have to be forced to cut spending because even if they take 100% of our pay checks they can still out spend what's coming in.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,479
|
Post by billisonboard on Jul 20, 2011 12:43:37 GMT -5
There are things that will help ... like term limits ... . The number of terms that an individual can serve is limited to the exact number that the majority of people wish for them to serve. I disagree that limiting the power of the people to determine who will represent them is a good idea.
|
|
verrip1
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:41:19 GMT -5
Posts: 2,992
|
Post by verrip1 on Jul 20, 2011 12:52:53 GMT -5
I believe it's both selfish and short-sighted. As to the government not handling your money the way you think they should, dancinmama, who voted those politicians into office? For that matter, who can vote them out? It's fairly easy to guess the voting pattern of the 45% of people who pay no income tax. That would make them both selfish and short-sighted.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Jul 20, 2011 13:01:02 GMT -5
I don't think of others as all that stupid, reasonfreedom. Your mileage may vary. I do believe people have different priorities, different reasoning, different ideas, and different goals. I also believe that to serve the good of the whole is the best way to achieve good for the individual. Again, you may see things differently. How do you know what is good for the whole if you don't know what is good for the individual? Shouldn't it be the other way around? Like I said most people don't even know what is good for themselves, how can you even think they would know what is good for the whole? Look at the average obesity rate from 20 to 30% in the U.S. and you think people should know what is good for the whole, so that it in turn makes good for them? That logic is throwing me for a loop. As I said, reasonfreedom, I don't believe people are as dumb as you seem to think they are. Most obese people know it isn't good for them to be obese. They're just unwilling to make the sacrifices necessary to lose the weight. The reason my logic throws you for a loop is because we view people very differently.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Jul 20, 2011 13:01:47 GMT -5
I believe it's both selfish and short-sighted. As to the government not handling your money the way you think they should, dancinmama, who voted those politicians into office? For that matter, who can vote them out? It's fairly easy to guess the voting pattern of the 45% of people who pay no income tax. That would make them both selfish and short-sighted. Agreed, verrip.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Jul 20, 2011 13:02:55 GMT -5
I would be more than happy to vote for bond initiatives, tax increases, etc. (and I am a fiscal conservative) IF I thought that the government would/could manage my hard-earned money efficiently/effectively; unfortunately, that is not the case.Dancinmama is sadly dead on in the above statement. In dealing with normal household finances you basically have 2 choices about money. 1. Make more or 2. Cut spending. In the instance of our government only one applies....cut spending. That's because you can look back & see that both parties spend more than the American people give them & they do it every year. They have to be forced to cut spending because even if they take 100% of our pay checks they can still out spend what's coming in. There's another choice, oldtex. Make more AND cut spending.
|
|
reasonfreedom
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 8:50:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,722
|
Post by reasonfreedom on Jul 20, 2011 14:09:55 GMT -5
How do you know what is good for the whole if you don't know what is good for the individual? Shouldn't it be the other way around? Like I said most people don't even know what is good for themselves, how can you even think they would know what is good for the whole? Look at the average obesity rate from 20 to 30% in the U.S. and you think people should know what is good for the whole, so that it in turn makes good for them? That logic is throwing me for a loop. As I said, reasonfreedom, I don't believe people are as dumb as you seem to think they are. Most obese people know it isn't good for them to be obese. They're just unwilling to make the sacrifices necessary to lose the weight. The reason my logic throws you for a loop is because we view people very differently. I don't know about you, but it is pretty easy to manipulate people or make them believe something that is not true. I have read multiple books on this and found it quite easy to do.
|
|
floridayankee
Junior Associate
If You Don't Stand Behind Our Troops, Feel Free to Stand in Front of Them.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:56:05 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by floridayankee on Jul 20, 2011 14:34:36 GMT -5
As I said, reasonfreedom, I don't believe people are as dumb as you seem to think they are. Most people are stupid. It's the first law of humanistics.
|
|
|
Post by BeenThere...DoneThat... on Jul 20, 2011 14:37:14 GMT -5
...wow... if any of us vote our conscience, then we are acting in our self-interest...
|
|
fairlycrazy23
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 27, 2010 23:55:19 GMT -5
Posts: 3,306
|
Post by fairlycrazy23 on Jul 20, 2011 14:43:10 GMT -5
of course it is not selfish to want to keep what you have earned.
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Jul 20, 2011 14:46:28 GMT -5
It is selfish, but there are situations where there is nothing wrong with being selfish. Turns out I am selfish because I don't want to pay for ex's lawyer. Ex used to be called selfish because he didn't want to buy cigarettes for his friends everyday. I've been called selfish for not letting people borrow my car.
There are times when you have to be selfish because no one is as interested in your needs more than you & you need to look out for yourself first.
|
|
dancinmama
Senior Associate
LIVIN' THE DREAM!!
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 20:49:45 GMT -5
Posts: 10,659
|
Post by dancinmama on Jul 20, 2011 14:57:02 GMT -5
I would be more than happy to vote for bond initiatives, tax increases, etc. (and I am a fiscal conservative) IF I thought that the government would/could manage my hard-earned money efficiently/effectively; unfortunately, that is not the case.Dancinmama is sadly dead on in the above statement. In dealing with normal household finances you basically have 2 choices about money. 1. Make more or 2. Cut spending. In the instance of our government only one applies....cut spending. That's because you can look back & see that both parties spend more than the American people give them & they do it every year. They have to be forced to cut spending because even if they take 100% of our pay checks they can still out spend what's coming in. oldtex: I live in CA and I can't tell you how many times I've seen a bond initiative on the ballot to raise money to fund something and it passes, only to see ANOTHER bond initiative for the SAME THING just a few short years later. Years and years ago the lottery initiative was on the ballot. Even though they said that it would "save the schools", I voted against it because I knew that statistically it is people who can least afford it that throw the most money away on lotteries. But it passed, a lot of people are poorer (in money wasted on tickets/games), and the CA education system never has enough money. Now, it's almost gotten to the point where I want to vote NO on anything that requires additional funds - not because I don't necessarily agree with what the funds will be used for (although sometimes that IS the case), but more often because no matter how much they get, it'll never be enough.
|
|
reasonfreedom
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 8:50:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,722
|
Post by reasonfreedom on Jul 20, 2011 15:10:08 GMT -5
It is selfish, but there are situations where there is nothing wrong with being selfish. Turns out I am selfish because I don't want to pay for ex's lawyer. Ex used to be called selfish because he didn't want to buy cigarettes for his friends everyday. I've been called selfish for not letting people borrow my car. There are times when you have to be selfish because no one is as interested in your needs more than you & you need to look out for yourself first. Are you trying to convince yourself or others that being selfish is good, because your not fooling me. If you think selfishness is good then I think delusions is the new in. Using the word need for anything other than to display the opposite of selfishness is complete non-sense. Selfish deals with want not need.
|
|
reasonfreedom
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 8:50:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,722
|
Post by reasonfreedom on Jul 20, 2011 15:16:25 GMT -5
I would be more than happy to vote for bond initiatives, tax increases, etc. (and I am a fiscal conservative) IF I thought that the government would/could manage my hard-earned money efficiently/effectively; unfortunately, that is not the case.Dancinmama is sadly dead on in the above statement. In dealing with normal household finances you basically have 2 choices about money. 1. Make more or 2. Cut spending. In the instance of our government only one applies....cut spending. That's because you can look back & see that both parties spend more than the American people give them & they do it every year. They have to be forced to cut spending because even if they take 100% of our pay checks they can still out spend what's coming in. oldtex: I live in CA and I can't tell you how many times I've seen a bond initiative on the ballot to raise money to fund something and it passes, only to see ANOTHER bond initiative for the SAME THING just a few short years later. Years and years ago the lottery initiative was on the ballot. Even though they said that it would "save the schools", I voted against it because I knew that statistically it is people who can least afford it that throw the most money away on lotteries. But it passed, a lot of people are poorer (in money wasted on tickets/games), and the CA education system never has enough money. Now, it's almost gotten to the point where I want to vote NO on anything that requires additional funds - not because I don't necessarily agree with what the funds will be used for (although sometimes that IS the case), but more often because no matter how much they get, it'll never be enough. Dancinmama, I understand that. You know how many people will vote for something because it sounds good. It is like all of those placebo effect items that people buy( like the balance wrist band ROFLMAO). The only problem with government programs is that we become reliant on them even though we don't need them. If government programs were used out of necessity, they would be extremely more efficient.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,479
|
Post by billisonboard on Jul 20, 2011 15:18:42 GMT -5
of course it is not selfish to want to keep what you have earned. Of course it isn't selfish to do that. What is selfish is to not be willing to pay for your share of the common expenses of the society you live in. What those expenses should be and what is your share is the question.
|
|
reasonfreedom
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 8:50:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,722
|
Post by reasonfreedom on Jul 20, 2011 15:21:23 GMT -5
of course it is not selfish to want to keep what you have earned. Of course it isn't selfish to do that. What is selfish is to not be willing to pay for your share of the common expenses of the society you live in. What those expenses should be and what is your share is the question. I can agree with that Billis.
|
|