Are Republicans holding the US back?

[Sheltopolis]

It puts more money in the pockets of those who earned it (i.e. the citizens).

Government spending stimulates the economy, does it not?

Not with our federal government, hell no.

It puts more money in the pockets of those who earned it (i.e. the citizens).

Not really. In fact, one could argue the exact opposite: with lower revenue, the government cannot provide as many services to the citizens as before. In times of economic crisis and high unemployment, these services (including welfare) are fundamental in ensuring that the demand from the citizenship onto the private sector remains high, by having even the poor acquire at least some minor purchase capacity.

The government (at least, in today's age) does nothing good in the long run to benefit society. While I concur welfare is a necessity, there are too many people that don't need to be on it, as it should only be a temporary solution. I'd like for middle class and rich families to be entitled to what they earn, at least most of it.

[Frisivisia]

Government spending stimulates the economy, does it not?

Not with our federal government, hell no.

Not really. In fact, one could argue the exact opposite: with lower revenue, the government cannot provide as many services to the citizens as before. In times of economic crisis and high unemployment, these services (including welfare) are fundamental in ensuring that the demand from the citizenship onto the private sector remains high, by having even the poor acquire at least some minor purchase capacity.

The government (at least, in today's age) does nothing good in the long run to benefit society. While I concur welfare is a necessity, there are too many people that don't need to be on it, as it should only be a temporary solution. I'd like for middle class and rich families to be entitled to what they earn, at least most of it.

Alright, so you don't believe that spending stimulates the economy, which tells me you know shit all about economics. Oh, and you don't understand welfare either! I'm going to disregard that which you say!

[Wesibaden]

have you been living under a rock?? AR-15 is on the ban list and as for Democrats / Congress that happened to be one of the video on Cspan

I didn't know that all Democrats were Diane Feinstein. Hmm.

Did i say they were?? nope but keep on failing

[Frisivisia]

I didn't know that all Democrats were Diane Feinstein. Hmm.

Did i say they were?? nope but keep on failing

By saying "Democrats" want to ban the AR-15, you sure did.

[Sheltopolis]

Not with our federal government, hell no.



The government (at least, in today's age) does nothing good in the long run to benefit society. While I concur welfare is a necessity, there are too many people that don't need to be on it, as it should only be a temporary solution. I'd like for middle class and rich families to be entitled to what they earn, at least most of it.

Alright, so you don't believe that spending stimulates the economy, which tells me you know shit all about economics. Oh, and you don't understand welfare either! I'm going to disregard that which you say!

What is it that I'm missing? More money has been spent under the last 2 presidents than their 42 predecessors; would you suggest we have benefited from that?

[Frisivisia]

Alright, so you don't believe that spending stimulates the economy, which tells me you know shit all about economics. Oh, and you don't understand welfare either! I'm going to disregard that which you say!

What is it that I'm missing? More money has been spent under the last 2 presidents than their 42 predecessors; would you suggest we have benefited from that?

Source and yes.

[Sheltopolis]

What is it that I'm missing? More money has been spent under the last 2 presidents than their 42 predecessors; would you suggest we have benefited from that?

Source and yes.

Here ya go. Just look at the debt, which was around $6T when Bush arrived; it now stands at $16T, as we all know.

[R Ev0lution]

Yes. They are. Additionally, it depresses me that Romney won, like, 47% of the popular vote. Even though it's also hilariously ironic.

To be clear, it's important to distinguish "Republicans" from "conservatives." Republicans are the batshit-crazy idiots who believe women have natural biological functions that can prevent rape pregnancies, who pretend that they weren't the first ones to propose and implement Obamacare, and who worship Bill O'Reilly. Conservatives are the reasonable ones who actually have something to contribute to debates about our nation's future, who don't shout "SOCIALISM" at every single thing (including ideas THEY THEMSELVES came up with), who abandoned the Republican Party after their relocation to Bullshit Mountain, and who now have to call themselves "moderate conservatives" to distinguish themselves from the idiots who watch Fox News.

[Frisivisia]

Source and yes.

Here ya go. Just look at the debt, which was around $6T when Bush arrived; it now stands at $16T, as we all know.

That doesn't tell me that more money has been spent under the last two presidents that their 42 predecessors.

[Frisivisia]

Yes. They are. Additionally, it depresses me that Romney won, like, 47% of the popular vote. Even though it's also hilariously ironic.

To be clear, it's important to distinguish "Republicans" from "conservatives." Republicans are the batshit-crazy idiots who believe women have natural biological functions that can prevent rape pregnancies, who pretend that they weren't the first ones to propose and implement Obamacare, and who worship Bill O'Reilly. Conservatives are the reasonable ones who actually have something to contribute to debates about our nation's future, who don't shout "SOCIALISM" at every single thing (including ideas THEY THEMSELVES came up with), who abandoned the Republican Party after their relocation to Bullshit Mountain, and who now have to call themselves "moderate conservatives" to distinguish themselves from the idiots who watch Fox News.

All conservatives fight change and economic sense, some less than others.

[Sheltopolis]

Here ya go. Just look at the debt, which was around $6T when Bush arrived; it now stands at $16T, as we all know.

That doesn't tell me that more money has been spent under the last two presidents that their 42 predecessors.

It kinda does. I can also use common sense and logic to make such a conclusion, even if I had no evidence.

[Frisivisia]

That doesn't tell me that more money has been spent under the last two presidents that their 42 predecessors.

It kinda does. I can also use common sense and logic to make such a conclusion, even if I had no evidence.

You can use common sense to determine every budget in United States History and adjust for inflation and compare?

Well you're something, aren't ya?

Oh, and it kinda doesn't.

[Angelia Island]

In a (slowly) modernising world,
Where Homosexuals can join in Marriage,
Where Mothers can choose to be Mothers,
Where Socialism is slowly becoming more popular, and people are slowly becoming tolerant of one another,
a country far away on distant shores is being held back by a group of child like adults where they refuse to just accept the future for what it is, for what it means...
Instead, they continue to argue against change, against the future.
Oh, they aren't alone in this conflict, but that will wait until another day.

The country?
The United States of America.
The group?
The Republicans (What a broad term. Let's stick with it for now)

WARNING: Moderately Long Read for some people ahead

The Republican Party of the United States of America is one of the most intolerant, ignorant and rather laughable political parties on the face of this planet, only because they are so well recognised by the international community for being so very thick.

It is an argument that the Republican Party is the cause for the United States' Debt Crisis, where overspending has led to a large debt crisis on the United States which people (Guess who?) blame the current President, Barrack Hussein Obama, for.
This is far, far from the truth.
The crises can be attributed to a large number of factors, primarily the bad Economic situation across the planet, US Congress and previous Presidents.
Let's start with US Congress.
For those of you that have at least a tiny bit of knowledge in US Politics, you'll know it isn't the President who assigns the budget directly.
It's the US Congress.^{A simple way to explain it.}
Lately, US Congress has been getting a little bit cocky with their budget allocation, and have started to WAY overspend the money they actually have to spend.
To those of you who are lost, I'm basically going over how Congress is OVERSPENDING US Income.
When the US Government Overspends, then basically it has to borrow money to get straight and not run out of money.
This creates Debt.
The Debt the US is infamous for.
The Debt that is ruining the US Economy.
And although the President can suggest budgets, they can be edited or scrapped entirely so that the congress can write a new one.
This creates an interesting problem in US politics, because the debt crisis can be blamed on the US President.

The following below is a bit crackpotty, you are free to ignore it:
It is possible that, since Congress is only slightly majority Republican, that they can purposely put out 'bad' budgets just so they can pin the blame on the president later, adding to their glorious bubble world that "LOL demicratz cant run an economy".


Socially, Republicans hate anyone that isn't a Republican for any reason.
Though I am a firm believer in state rights, RELIGION shouldn't be the leading cause of Homophobia in politics.
Really now, who are you to mix Religion and Politics!? Two things that SHOULDN'T BE MIXED. EVER.

Outright banning Gay Marriage because "it goes against my slightly dodgy, holy text that ONLY ON VERY RARE OCCASIONS Contradicts itself because of mistranslation and added information" is simply put, rather... ... what's a better word for stupid?
In a world that is emerging as tolerant 'peaceful' (LOL, why is that in there?) nationstates (I'm bad at puns) and gay people can join in state approved marriage, why must you deny them these rights?
How does this affect you in any way at all?
They're not FORCING heterosexual men to marry them...

Another argument against Gay Marriage is "letting two men (why is it always men... *sigh*) marry is like a man marrying a *Inset object, animal or child*".
First of all, the two men in question are consenting, loving adults.
Secondly, you're replacing the second consenting adult with something that cannot give consent; ie: A toaster.
Something that cannot possibly give consent, despite being a living thing, ie: A dog.
And finally, something that can give consent, but cannot fully think out the consequences because they are not mature, a child.

where 2 start dat:
2 Consenting Men (or Woman) =/= 1 Consenting Man (or Woman), and something that cannot give consent.
I'd like to finish this badly constructed point by saying something I've said before, "How does this affect you in any way".

The same goes to Abortion.
Reading a thread five minutes before that had a "unreliable republican source" (Cough cough, guess...) that said that woman was 'nearly killed' after not given anesthetic for an abortion in a Planned Parenthood Clinic in some other US State, I saw right through this for what it really was:
An article of a small, over exaggerated event made exaggerated to make people angry.

Really now, there is little evidence to support the foetus as a 'living, thinking creature' the GOP and other like minded people make it out to be.
Really, it is half the mother's DNA, and half of the father's. A collection of Cells building and arranging themselves, preparing for Birth.
People asking "What if you were/going to be aborted! How would you feel!?"
This is how I always, forever will respond:

"I wouldn't be alive to complain."

It just doesn't make sense to me.
Why (and HOW) Republicans are against Abortion.
If a women can't have a baby, as in can't afford it or cannot have it without medical problems, then shouldn't be allowed to 'opt' out?
I mean, if a women is threatened by her pregnancy, is she not ENTITLED to have an abortion to save her life?
I can think of one recent case in Ireland where this has happened.
It could possibly happen in the United States.

What if she's a rape victim?
How would the child grow up psychologically, knowing it was a rape child?
How would the child feel if they found this out on their own after a coverup since birth!?
How would the mother afford this child is she's POOR!?

There. Not only are the Republicans holding the US back socially, they have no care in the world for people who cannot live up to their standards.

Another thing - Republicans act like this is COMPULSORY, not a choice.
Let's finish this once and for all, shall we?

Gay Marriage - Not Compulsory, a Choice.
Abortion - Not Compulsory, a Choice.
Euthanasia - Not Compulsory, a Choice.

Let's clear up some Right Wing clutter while we're here...

Sexuality - Not a choice.
Gender - Not a choice.
Pregnancy (from Rape or any other occasion you don't intentionally conceive) - Not a choice.
Other peoples actions upon you - Not a choice...

Republicans need to understand this. Sometimes, I think they don't.
Once we put these pesky social problems behind us, we can move forward as a society and actually focus on what is important right now:
- The Economy,
- Medical Technologies,
- Agriculture Technologies,
- The Debt Problem...
- DPRK

Inside the spoiler, you'll find:
A poorly constructed argument that states that the Republicans are holding the US back Socially, Economically.
If I could word things properly, I would be a much more effective speaker.


So, NS, I'm presuming you already have a political bias against the GOP, my question to you is this...
Is the Republican Party holding the United States back from progression into a better world?

Poll included for your enjoyment.

Both Yes and No. Democrats are very fit for the modern environment. However, if there was only one major party, our country wouldn't continue to grow. Both parties, Democrat and Republican, are necessary to maintain a balance within the US. If only one party dominated, we could have an corrupt or immoral government and there would be no one to challenge it. Although Republicans aren't looked fondly upon, eventually they society will evolve into a state that is more favorable upon the Republican Party.

[Sheltopolis]

It kinda does. I can also use common sense and logic to make such a conclusion, even if I had no evidence.

You can use common sense to determine every budget in United States History and adjust for inflation and compare?

Well you're something, aren't ya?

Oh, and it kinda doesn't.

And why is that?

[Frisivisia]

You can use common sense to determine every budget in United States History and adjust for inflation and compare?

Well you're something, aren't ya?

Oh, and it kinda doesn't.

And why is that?

How does "Obama increased the debt more than Bush" show that Obama and Bush have spent more that all the rest of the presidents?

[Sheltopolis]

And why is that?

How does "Obama increased the debt more than Bush" show that Obama and Bush have spent more that all the rest of the presidents?

Spending = debt. That's the way it's been for the past 13+ years.

[Frisivisia]

How does "Obama increased the debt more than Bush" show that Obama and Bush have spent more that all the rest of the presidents?

Spending = debt. That's the way it's been for the past 13+ years.

Spending =/= debt.

[Sheltopolis]

Spending = debt. That's the way it's been for the past 13+ years.

Spending =/= debt.

What evidence do you have to support that?

[Frisivisia]

Spending =/= debt.

What evidence do you have to support that?

You can spend without going into debt.

What evidence have you that spending is the same as debt?

[Sheltopolis]

What evidence do you have to support that?

You can spend without going into debt.

What evidence have you that spending is the same as debt?

Our government is spending out of its mind. Not all spending contributes to our debt, but so much of it does; Wars, Social Security, Medicare, stimuli...

[Frisivisia]

You can spend without going into debt.

What evidence have you that spending is the same as debt?

Our government is spending out of its mind. Not all spending contributes to our debt, but so much of it does; Wars, Social Security, Medicare, stimuli...

So you concede that spending is not debt?

[Sheltopolis]

Our government is spending out of its mind. Not all spending contributes to our debt, but so much of it does; Wars, Social Security, Medicare, stimuli...

So you concede that spending is not debt?

Not always. But mostly, in today's government.

[Frisivisia]

So you concede that spending is not debt?

Not always. But mostly, in today's government.

I'll take that as a yes.

Now tell me, why is debt bad?

[Sheltopolis]

Not always. But mostly, in today's government.

I'll take that as a yes.

Now tell me, why is debt bad?

Is that a serious question?

[Freiheit Reich]

Yes and no. Many republicans support minimum wage and also increasing the national debt as well as bailouts for industry. This has held us back.

Also many republicans support the trade embargo with N. Korea, Iran, and Cuba as well as restrictions on prostitution and marijuana which also hurts the US economy.

Democrats hold the USA back more than republicans though.