US of A Presidential Elections 2012

We all make use of publicly funded things on a regular basis but most don't think about it. Roads are the biggest example. Without the way we currently fund and take care of roads, life would be very different.
 
Bad Bowtie said:
I'd rather pay for 1 program instead of 2. If they get sick and live off disability, so be it (while were at it: needz moar drug testing). I am covered under my parents health insurance now, and I would be hard pressed to take a job that doesn't provide insurance...so why would I need to pay for it (everyone's healthcare) again?
Click to expand...
Because if they don't have some transferrable illness because they were treated for it, you might avoid getting it from them. If they get flu shots, they might not get the flu in the autumn, and you may end up not having to take a sick day off work. As societies, we benefit hugely from making sure our fellow people are as healthy as we can. Think of us as a big army of people not following orders and doing what we want. We're still a part of the same community and still try to achieve a higher standard of living for ourselves, so there is a sort of common goal. This big army can't function without healthy people. And you can't have healthy people over a working life without some sort of health care, in many cases.

People without health care are a liability for society. So you make sure they have it. It's very basic economics.

What you really say is that you don't like paying taxes. No one does (well, I actually do, I even like conscription), but the key reasoning of taxes is that you don't get to decide what it's used for. It's all in a big pot of money that's used for x, y and z.

Bad Bowtie said:
I realize what I'm saying makes me sound a bit selfish, but socialism, even in small bits, does not appeal to me in the slightest.
Click to expand...
GET OFF THE BLOODY ROADS THEN!
 
I have been called into work with a transferable illness before because I didn't have sick days. I remember one of the girls working there saying that she had been sick one day and they wouldn't let her go home so she ended up throwing up all over the floor. People don't really care if you are contagious as long as it is not something serious.
 
Candidate Huntsman has tweeted ?To be clear I believe in evolution and trust scientists on global warming. Call me crazy.? Yep, they will call you crazy. :p
 
I so need someone to explain in detail global warming and what are all the possible fixes - I said in detail. The loads of scientists think it is correct argument is clearly bollocks, why do they think it is right and where is the correlation with the weather and what other possibilities are there (Why not solar wind for instance?).

Finally CO2 may be a 'green house gas' what are all of the others and how are they getting into the atmosphere? Then may be I'll believe them but until that happens I choose not to.
 
We cut down the biggest consumer of CO2 at an alarming rate. Deforestation is a big problem in the gloabal warming problem. Instead of using responsable techniques, we simply clear cut the forests. It is also against the law to grow Cannabis in any form, and it is a known to be a high consumer of CO2. And Hemp can also replace much of what we use wood for, and many of the plastics too.

I know, it is Peirs Morgan, but it is a good representation of what is good and bad about Ron Paul.

 
WillDAQ said:
Run a way in fear; socialism is here to eat your children and drive up your tax base rate. If we're not careful we might end up helping someone worse off than our selves, and that just doesn't cut it in the heavily christian USA.
Click to expand...

Such an odd thing to say so let us address this issue from Fairbanks Alaska. Let see the local Rescue Mission that houses families and folks down on their luck and without work is, wait here it comes, Christian and its funding comes from, ready? Yes Christians omg and it is also a charity that I give too.
Shall we move on how about feeding the poor? There are three places in our little town where you can get 3 hot meals a day. But they are all run and funded by Churches; go figure those nasty Christians feeding the poor.
So there is this poor old lady who is not a Christian and her Boiler (furnace) is broken, she does not have the money to get it repaired who does she call, or the women with 4 kids and her husband ran off with some other gal and now her car is broken but she is broke, who does she call. Well in this town you call LOVE Inc. All the churches in town support this program and they will send someone out to fix the old ladies boiler for free (I did that once when I was a heater fixing type guy). Those darn Christians again come together and offering free services to those in need.
Your kid need supplies and clothes to go to school omg there is a Christian program that gets them vouchers to get new stuff to go to school with. They also can get a hot dinner after school and tutoring for school through OH God not another Christian program.
So what are the liberals doing to help their fellow man?
P.S. I donate to these programs with more time and money then even under so socialism I would pay in taxes.
 
alaskarat said:
Such an odd thing to say so let us address this issue from Fairbanks Alaska. Let see the local Rescue Mission that houses families and folks down on their luck and without work is, wait here it comes, Christian and its funding comes from, ready? Yes Christians omg and it is also a charity that I give too.
Shall we move on how about feeding the poor? There are three places in our little town where you can get 3 hot meals a day. But they are all run and funded by Churches; go figure those nasty Christians feeding the poor.
So there is this poor old lady who is not a Christian and her Boiler (furnace) is broken, she does not have the money to get it repaired who does she call, or the women with 4 kids and her husband ran off with some other gal and now her car is broken but she is broke, who does she call. Well in this town you call LOVE Inc. All the churches in town support this program and they will send someone out to fix the old ladies boiler for free (I did that once when I was a heater fixing type guy). Those darn Christians again come together and offering free services to those in need.
Your kid need supplies and clothes to go to school omg there is a Christian program that gets them vouchers to get new stuff to go to school with. They also can get a hot dinner after school and tutoring for school through OH God not another Christian program.
So what are the liberals doing to help their fellow man?
P.S. I donate to these programs with more time and money then even under so socialism I would pay in taxes.
Click to expand...
What's your point? We've got these guys in Norway too, tax socialist hell, and they're well funded and respected through all of society. One doesn't exclude the other. Religious people who want to help should be alloved to help.

I just don't get this excessive need to organize everything from a fire department to a health system in so many individual, different ways. It smacks of individuality for individuality's sake. Being different and independant, not because it's best, but because that's how you're used to doing things.

I spent a year without a steady job. Did I claim benefits? No. I could have, and with some saving, I'd live without a student loan, or a smaller student loan, right now. But I didn't feel I needed it, I still made some money and I could stay with my parents. But some people can't, for a number of reasons stay with their parents. Some people can't seem to make any money, or enough money, even if they try. These people can't pay for their own health care. They can't afford it. Which, if I'm not mistaken, is why the US already does health care for these people. It's called Medicaid.

Add into that the fact that seemingly, it's less expensive.. Well. I don't know why you wouldn't like that. The government still isn't running the hospitals, it's just paying for them. That's a big buyer..
 
Cobol74 said:
(Why not solar wind for instance?).
Click to expand...

Feels like when people suggest illnesses to explain symptoms to doctors and when the doctors tell them it doesn't fit, they go on about how the read about it somewhere and it does. I don't see how you can deny the existence of global warming when it is a measurable fact.
 
Last edited:
All I can say is never watch House if you're noticing certain symptoms. I spent a day convinced I had something really serious, but not Lupus.
 
Cold Fussion said:
Feels like when people suggest illnesses to explain symptoms to doctors and when the doctors tell them it doesn't fit, they go on about how the read about it somewhere and it does. I don't see how you can deny the existence of global warming when it is a measurable fact.
Click to expand...

Being pedantic, Climate Change was been proven, not Global Warming. What hasn't been proven is what is causing it.
 
It wasn't clear what he doesn't believe in. There are still people though who don't believe that the earth is warming despite the evidence to show it.

nomix said:
All I can say is never watch House if you're noticing certain symptoms. I spent a day convinced I had something really serious, but not Lupus.
Click to expand...

There has never been a recorded case of lupus. Ever.
 
Last edited:
If I'm not mistaken, Climate Change and Global Warming is one and the same. It's just that Global Warming is a little bit misleading as many parts of the world won't get warmer, but colder (for instance those parts of the world that's heated by the Gulf Stream), according to the leading teses. It was a PR nightmare, because peolpe who either didn't know better or people who just wanted to mislead said "it's cold outside because not enough people are driving Range Rovers".

I'm not settled on climate change. But I think it's funny to see people call it disproven because it gets colder. In some parts of the world, like Norway and the UK, that are the projected concequences.
 
nomix said:
If I'm not mistaken, Climate Change and Global Warming is one and the same. It's just that Global Warming is a little bit misleading as many parts of the world won't get warmer, but colder (for instance those parts of the world that's heated by the Gulf Stream), according to the leading teses. It was a PR nightmare, because peolpe who either didn't know better or people who just wanted to mislead said "it's cold outside because not enough people are driving Range Rovers".

I'm not settled on climate change. But I think it's funny to see people call it disproven because it gets colder. In some parts of the world, like Norway and the UK, that are the projected concequences.
Click to expand...

If climate change shuts down the the gulf stream then northern europe will plunge into an ice age.
 
From what I have heard this is an earth weather cycle more than people fucking up the world so I don't know why that has to do with politics.
 
katwalk said:
From what I have heard this is an earth weather cycle more than people fucking up the world so I don't know why that has to do with politics.
Click to expand...

the main sticking point is that although cycles are normal, the current cycle has advanced far more rapidly and at a greater temperature change than any which have been recorded before.

This rapid increase also coincides with our industrial era.
 
Last edited:
Regardless, pumping all the shit we do into the atmosphere clearly does something (just look at all the smog in cities in today and especially in the late 1800s) and we should really try limiting that regardless of climate change, which seems often forgotten now.
 
Regardless of where anyone stands on climate change, conservation and intelligent use of natural resources is always a good thing imo.

Anyway, back on topic...
 
Cold Fussion said:
If climate change shuts down the the gulf stream then northern europe will plunge into an ice age.
Click to expand...
That's basicly the idea. The idea is that if the temperature goes up enough, the North Pole might melt. Now, that's not the same problem as with the South Pole. The South Pole ice mass is on top of land, so if it melts, the sea level will rise. The same is not true with the North Pole. To illustrate the point, fill a glass with water and a couple of ice cubes, and mark the water level. Then, when it melts, it won't have risen.

The thing is that if the Gulf stream is exposed to the colder, polar water, it might be disturbed and have some sort of shutdown between North America and Europe.

So yeah. That would lead to colder climate. Probably extremely cold climate. No more agriculture for a start, and welcome permafrost and Siberian temperatures in coastal areas. It'll be disasterous.

Now, I don't know either way. I'm not a scientist. And my explanation is probably extremely oversimplyfied. But that's what I've been able to gather about the theory. Seems plausable enough to me. Also illustrates why while 'Global Warming' is technically correct, as it refers to a higher average temperature on the globe as a whole, but it is, as mentioned, a PR nightmare.

"Oh, this global warming is just a lie, it's bloody cold here."

Hence the switch of terms to 'climate change'. Which is, if we are to be honest, just as accurate to describe said theory.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top