Romney speaks the truth, dems crying; 47% of Americans are moochers

[demons2005]

http://swampland.time.com/2012/09/17/video-captures-uncensored-mitt-romney-at-fundraiser/ :cheers:

Of course some people don't like hearing the truth but I'm glad this got out, shows Romney is just pretending to be a moron to get some of the big government vote. He knows the real deal about mooching and americans who dont take personal responsibility. He's no Ron Paul in terms of integrity, but I'll take him over Barry "handout" Bama

[oh the horror]

Riiiiiiiiiiiight. And that so called 'truth' will lead Romney and his people right into the loser's bracket.

[demons2005]

Riiiiiiiiiiiight. And that so called 'truth' will lead Romney and his people right into the loser's bracket.
You couldn't be more wrong. 53% of hard working, responsible Americans are TIRED of forced government charity being given to a bunch of drunks and lazy moochers. The 53% of responsible hardworking americans who are by the way much more likely to vote even though they have less time on their hands will be out in force to make sure Obama doesn't drag this country to hell by 2016.

I can't wait to see yalls reaction on Nov. 6

[Real Men Wear Green]

Romney's quote is mathematically garbage (no one that pays taxes votes for Obama? What?) as well as politically damaging. There's a reason he'd never have said that in public when he knew he was being recorded. You can't insult half the population if you're trying to get elected. He just dissed a lot of the racist birther idiots making jack shit alongside the poor voters that figure Obama's policies will make it easier for them. Fortunately for him those birther idiots will vote against the Muslim EuroCommie regardless but this kind f line will turn off the shrinking number of undecideds that were still considering him. That SNL skit was on point about Obama's secret weapon.

[KevinNYC]

I don't get these people who are rooting for the country to repeat the Great Depression.

[L.Kizzle]

I don't get these people who are rooting for the country to repeat the Great Depression.
It wont effect them that's why.

[Black Joker]

not a big fan of getting into political discussions here, but not sure it's the most legitimate thing to say that those who aren't paying income taxes are mooching or not taking responsibility because a large faction of the 47% of people who aren't paying federal income taxes are retirees; many of whom are part of the conservative base. Another portion would be people who lost their jobs... and Obama does have to take a hit on high unemployment, but eh firing shots about other people not paying enough taxes when you yourself haven't released your own is, well... just not a good look

[Jameerthefear]

So Romney says something with no real evidence behind it and you immediately hang on his nuts op?

[D-Rose]

OP is a moron, just like Romney.

A dude seriously told me today that Obama is trying to destroy America, his goal being to run up the deficit and throw the country into economic death. All based on his origins as a Muslim and ties to some radical guy in India.

I was like... :oldlol: GTFOH damn redneck bigots.

[Sarcastic]

:lol The biggest moochers are the so called red states, whose votes he is counting on to get elected.

[CelticBaller]

Conservatives lol

[magictricked]

Instead of guessing about the demographics we can look for ourselves

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#val=USP00p1

[embersyc]

Instead of guessing about the demographics we can look for ourselves

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#val=USP00p1

Looks like Obama got 52% of the highest income bracket.

:bowdown:

[Norcaliblunt]

Screw Obama, but these republicans who are like "COME FLAY ME ALIVE AND STRIP ME OF MY ECONOMIC RIGHTS!", are just out of control.

[Dictator]

:coleman:

[ClutchOver9000]

Romney done goofed...

[joe]

Romney has no plans to cut entitlement spending. He has hinted that he might not spend as much on certain programs as Obama, but that's just a hint, and again, it's not cutting. So ya, maybe the perception among entitlement voters is that Romney will leave them out on the street, but it's not reality.

[Whoah10115]

I know no one is discussing politics with the Chris Paul poster guy.

[Norcaliblunt]

Romney has no plans to cut entitlement spending. He has hinted that he might not spend as much on certain programs as Obama, but that's just a hint, and again, it's not cutting. So ya, maybe the perception among entitlement voters is that Romney will leave them out on the street, but it's not reality.

Oh yeah that was your boy neo-confederate/christian re-constructionist/Romney campaign asset, Ron Goldbug Paul who wanted a deflationary crash and mass genocide of the American people. Entitlements? How about economic rights. You can take that foreign, Un-American, Austrian, anarchist, wrecker crap back to the Rockefeller funded Von Mises institute it comes from.

And don't think for a second I support that Wall Street puppet Barry Soetoro.

[joe]

Oh yeah that was your boy neo-confederate/christian re-constructionist/Romney campaign asset, Ron Goldbug Paul who wanted a deflationary crash and mass genocide of the American people. Entitlements? How about economic rights. You can take that foreign, Un-American, Austrian, anarchist, wrecker crap back to the Rockefeller funded Von Mises institute it comes from.

And don't think for a second I support that Wall Street puppet Barry Soetoro.


Ya, the guys who bribe the government for all their money and power love the Mises institute, which calls for an end to the government institutions they take advantage of. That's why Austrian economists are all over the federal reserve boards, Goldman Sachs, etc.

Truth: The big dirty banks and oil companies don't want free markets, they want government markets. Free markets would actually force them to *gasp* satisfy their customers to make a profit, instead of seeing who can best infiltrate the government and gain the most influence with Uncle Sam.

Since you brought up Ron Paul, I'll use one of his lines. "I don't think anyone has the 'right' to someone elses money."

If you have the right to entitlements, someone else loses their right to keep their money. To me, something isn't a right if it requires an unconnected third party to sacrifice his rights in the process.

If A's rights infringe on B's rights, does B really have rights? And aren't rights supposed to be a human thing, not a "special interest group" thing? I thought rights were for all of us. I understand that I come off as defending the rich and not caring about the poor, but it works in reverse, too. I don't think the poor people should be taxed to subsidize big agriculture, either.

[senelcoolidge]

You guys realize all of this ridiculous spending is going to break the dollar..do you know what that means..ever lived in a third world country. Life is probably not so bad right now..comfortable even..well it won't be if that happens.

[Blue&Orange]

http://swampland.time.com/2012/09/17/video-captures-uncensored-mitt-romney-at-fundraiser/ :cheers:

Of course some people don't like hearing the truth but I'm glad this got out, shows Romney is just pretending to be a moron to get some of the big government vote. He knows the real deal about mooching and americans who dont take personal responsibility. He's no Ron Paul in terms of integrity, but I'll take him over Barry "handout" Bama

[QUOTE]This from a man who pays 14% in taxes

[Brunch@Five]

Ya, the guys who bribe the government for all their money and power love the Mises institute, which calls for an end to the government institutions they take advantage of. That's why Austrian economists are all over the federal reserve boards, Goldman Sachs, etc.

Truth: The big dirty banks and oil companies don't want free markets, they want government markets. Free markets would actually force them to *gasp* satisfy their customers to make a profit, instead of seeing who can best infiltrate the government and gain the most influence with Uncle Sam.

Since you brought up Ron Paul, I'll use one of his lines. "I don't think anyone has the 'right' to someone elses money."

If you have the right to entitlements, someone else loses their right to keep their money. To me, something isn't a right if it requires an unconnected third party to sacrifice his rights in the process.

If A's rights infringe on B's rights, does B really have rights? And aren't rights supposed to be a human thing, not a "special interest group" thing? I thought rights were for all of us. I understand that I come off as defending the rich and not caring about the poor, but it works in reverse, too. I don't think the poor people should be taxed to subsidize big agriculture, either.

charter of human rights: http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml

art. 22: "Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality."

art. 23, (3): "Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection."

art. 25 (1): "Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control."

[joe]

charter of human rights: http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml

art. 22: "Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality."

art. 23, (3): "Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection."

art. 25 (1): "Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control."

Since when is the UN the authority on human rights? This list is a disgrace. If government policy consistently pursued the above goals, our economy would shrink to 3rd world standards and millions of Americans would starve to death.


"Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection."

The only thing working people are entitled to is enough to maintain human dignity? So why should anyone keep working after they reach the government-mandated human dignity level? Why create the next great product or business, if the only thing your hard work buys you is the same amount of human dignity you'd have been given for free had you never worked at all?

[Brunch@Five]

Since when is the UN the authority on human rights? This list is a disgrace. If government policy consistently pursued the above goals, our economy would shrink to 3rd world standards and millions of Americans would starve to death.

are you trolling? They have a plain language version for children too: http://www.un.org/cyberschoolbus/humanrights/resources/plain.asp

[raiderfan19]

are you trolling? They have a plain language version for children too: http://www.un.org/cyberschoolbus/humanrights/resources/plain.asp
He's not really wrong though. The basic premise that anything the government gives someone who hasn't earned it, the government first must take from someone who did earn it, thereby removing the incentive to earn is essentially the theme of atlas shrugged. It's not new and it's not stupid.

[Brunch@Five]

He's not really wrong though. The basic premise that anything the government gives someone who hasn't earned it, the government first must take from someone who did earn it, thereby removing the incentive to earn is essentially the theme of atlas shrugged. It's not new and it's not stupid.

I know it's not a new concept, socio-economic theory calls it the "Samaritan's Dilemma".
But leave the government out of it for a while: do we as a society have a responsibility to care for our members?

We have those human rights, extending to shelter, clothes, medical care and so on because we know that there are power structures in the world that favor the more fortunate over the less fortunate. Giving everyone those human rights prevents societies like we have seen in past centuries, or right now in less developed countries, where there is a rich ruling elite and a huge mass of people that are poor and starving.

[joe]

I know it's not a new concept, socio-economic theory calls it the "Samaritan's Dilemma".
But leave the government out of it for a while: do we as a society have a responsibility to care for our members?

We have those human rights, extending to shelter, clothes, medical care and so on because we know that there are power structures in the world that favor the more fortunate over the less fortunate. Giving everyone those human rights prevents societies like we have seen in past centuries, or right now in less developed countries, where there is a rich ruling elite and a huge mass of people that are poor and starving.

I don't disagree with the place your heart is. I think human beings should treat each other with dignity, and helping the poor should be high on our priority list. Nobody could say that those aren't great virtues :) I just think the poor will be better off the more capitalist their society/government is, and worse off the less so :cheers:

[Brunch@Five]

I don't disagree with the place your heart is. I think human beings should treat each other with dignity, and helping the poor should be high on our priority list. Nobody could say that those aren't great virtues :) I just think the poor will be better off the more capitalist their society/government is, and worse off the less so :cheers:

yep, you can definitely always argue over how much the government should provide - that's a legitimate debate. :cheers: But I don't think we should question the right of each and everyone to be provided with basic needs by society if they are not able to provide them for themselves.

[rufuspaul]

I lament the death of the Republican party. They desperately need to move back closer to the center (ala Reagan) and recruit leaders that aren't total dipshit assholes.

Let's look at that 47%. 20% are children. Yeah they've been freeloading for too long now thanks to the socialist child labor laws. :rolleyes: Another 12-13% are elderly or disabled. That leaves about 14% who don't pay taxes because their income is close to or below the poverty line. Ridiculous.

I understand that Romney was pandering to the rich elite in the crowd, but if he really wants to show that they are the ones who carry the country on their backs he should show us his tax returns.

[Blue&Orange]

The only thing working people are entitled to is enough to maintain human dignity? So why should anyone keep working after they reach the government-mandated human dignity level?
The word "only" is nowhere on the phrase you quoted... off course you're a right winger, you lack education to even read right.


I just think the poor will be better off the more capitalist their society/government is, and worse off the less so

This is probably one of the dumbest things i ever read in my entire life.

I would love to hear how the thing that takes the health that belonged to many, and gives it to just a few, the thing that is making the middle class a thing of the past, the thing that is creating more poor people every passing day, can in the end improve the quality of life of the poor people.

Only a delusional right wing illiterate nut job could spew such ridicule.

[raiderfan19]

The word "only" is nowhere on the phrase you quoted... off course you're a right winger, you lack education to even read right.

This is probably one of the dumbest things i ever read in my entire life.

I would love to hear how the thing that takes the health that belonged to many, and gives it to just a few, the thing that is making the middle class a thing of the past, the thing that is creating more poor people every passing day, can in the end improve the quality of life of the poor people.

Only a delusional right wing illiterate nut job could spew such ridicule.
You realize we've gotten less capitalist not more capitalist recently right

[IGOTGAME]

47% percentile of income is about 43k. Make less than that and you are a victim begging for entitlements who is voting Obama! Shit doesn't make sense on multiple levels. Guy is horrible. Demographics are so off.

[Take Your Lumps]

Non-payers by state:

http://taxfoundation.org/sites/taxfoundation.org/files/UserFiles/Image/Fiscal%20Facts/20100524-229-nonpayers-mapM.jpg

Surprise, surprise...who's mooching off of who?

http://taxfoundation.org/article/states-vary-widely-number-tax-filers-no-income-tax-liability

[Rasheed1]

I lament the death of the Republican party. They desperately need to move back closer to the center (ala Reagan) and recruit leaders that aren't total dipshit assholes.

Let's look at that 47%. 20% are children. Yeah they've been freeloading for too long now thanks to the socialist child labor laws. :rolleyes: Another 12-13% are elderly or disabled. That leaves about 14% who don't pay taxes because their income is close to or below the poverty line. Ridiculous.

I understand that Romney was pandering to the rich elite in the crowd, but if he really wants to show that they are the ones who carry the country on their backs he should show us his tax returns.


Thank God... This basically what I coming to say, but you took care of it..

plus poor people pay big portions of their income paying sales tax and other taxes for things that they buy day to day


Income tax isnt the only tax there is... Republicans like to throw that stat around without clarifying it means.

[Sarcastic]

You realize we've gotten less capitalist not more capitalist recently right


If you think that, then 1940's - 1970's USA must be full blown socialism to you then.

[Whoah10115]

I lament the death of the Republican party. They desperately need to move back closer to the center (ala Reagan) and recruit leaders that aren't total dipshit assholes.

Let's look at that 47%. 20% are children. Yeah they've been freeloading for too long now thanks to the socialist child labor laws. :rolleyes: Another 12-13% are elderly or disabled. That leaves about 14% who don't pay taxes because their income is close to or below the poverty line. Ridiculous.

I understand that Romney was pandering to the rich elite in the crowd, but if he really wants to show that they are the ones who carry the country on their backs he should show us his tax returns.



This is a great point, but it's a very sad political landscape when something is this transparently stupid.

[bagelred]

The corporations that run this country and the Federal Reserve banks are the biggest moochers by far.....but keep blaming poor people.

[DonDadda59]

game, set, match before the thing even got started. Seems like mitt decided he hadn't done a thorough enough job of reminding voters that he is a out of touch elitist who was born with a silver spoon in his mouth. Guy was born on third and thinks he hit a triple.

Best part is that a lot of the people he just pissed on will be cheering for this clown at his rallies when he details his plan to tax them and make life as easy as possible for his rich yacht club buddies.

[KevinNYC]

He's not really wrong though. The basic premise that anything the government gives someone who hasn't earned it, the government first must take from someone who did earn it, thereby removing the incentive to earn is essentially the theme of atlas shrugged. It's not new and it's not stupid.

No he is actually way, way wrong.

The largest group in the 47% is the ederly. If you are living off Social Security, you generally do not pay Federal income tax. This is something they have payed into before they retire and designed to give them a dignified retirement. It also frees up the economic power of their children, who since they are not fully caring for their parents/grandparents, have more money to spend or save or invest.

http://www.slate.com/content/dam/slate/blogs/moneybox/2012/09/17/retirees_and_students_often_don_t_pay_income_taxes/1347928920357.png.CROP.article568-large.png
Another group who is included in the 47% are students.

The bulk of people in the "47%" do pay FEDERAL Taxes, they pay payroll taxes.
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxtopics/images/Breakdown2-06-17-11.gif

40% of Federal Revenue is raised through payroll taxes and 42% is raised through incomes taxes.

My favorite way Romney is wrong is saying that this 47% represents Obama voters.

As pointed out above, most of them are elderly, in the 2010 elections
Republicans won older voters by 21 points, 59 percent to 38 percent.

[KevinNYC]

Let's look at that 47%. 20% are children. Yeah they've been freeloading for too long now thanks to the socialist child labor laws. :rolleyes: Another 12-13% are elderly or disabled. That leaves about 14% who don't pay taxes because their income is close to or below the poverty line. Ridiculous.

The figure they are using is 47% of households, not 47% of the population. It's derived from households filing tax returns, so young children are not part of it for the most part.

The other thing to consider is the reason the 47% is number is so high, reflects two things, a weakness in the economy and Congress's desire to expand tax credits like the Earned Income Tax Credit (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/09/18/how-paying-no-federal-income-taxes-helps-the-poor-get-off-welfare-and-into-work/) which actually helps low income families become less dependent on the government.


Why don’t 47 percent of Americans pay federal income taxes? One major reason: Tax credits that were passed with major bipartisan support — namely the Earned Income Tax Credit and the Child Tax Credit. And there’s a wealth of research showing that both of these tax breaks have been effective at lifting these Americans out of poverty and encourage them to move from welfare to work.

[shlver]

Some of the 47% do pay income tax. The lower portion of the 47% with negative income taxes are offset by those who do pay in the 47%. The net income tax collected by the government is then from the top 53%. Misleading because those who do pay in the bottom 47% are thinking that they are supporting the freeloaders not realizing that Romney called them a freeloader.

[TheMan]

I fully expect Romney to say some more stupid shit up until election day...dude is a moron.

[niko]

WIthout arguing the numbers, was this not a stupid thing to say? It's so easily twisted, interpeted, etc. in different ways, most of them making him look bad.

[boozehound]

You couldn't be more wrong. 53% of hard working, responsible Americans are TIRED of forced government charity being given to a bunch of drunks and lazy moochers. The 53% of responsible hardworking americans who are by the way much more likely to vote even though they have less time on their hands will be out in force to make sure Obama doesn't drag this country to hell by 2016.

I can't wait to see yalls reaction on Nov. 6
are you really this naive? almost 100% of that 47% are elderly, earn under 20k per year, or pay payroll taxes. The idea that anyone voting for obama doesnt pay taxes is both preposterous and ludicrous. Try and get a realistic perspective.

[KevinNYC]

are you really this naive? almost 100% of that 47% are elderly, earn under 20k per year, or pay payroll taxes. The idea that anyone voting for obama doesnt pay taxes is both preposterous and ludicrous. Try and get a realistic perspective.

There's a couple of points to be made.

One.
This 47% in NO way represents Obama voters. A lot of those 47% are voting for Romney.
In addition to the elderly how break heavily Republican, a lot of white working class folks are in that 47%due to Earned Income Tax Credit* and the Child Tax Credit. (http://www.irs.gov/uac/Ten-Facts-about-the-Child-Tax-Credit) Particularly larger families.

White voters without a college degree vote something like 57% to 35 % Republican.

Two.
The 47% number does not reflect people who pay NO federal taxes, just federal income taxes, this is because the large tax credits available.

*The Earned Income Tax Credit is, for most people, a temporary safety net. Over 60% who get it pay incomes taxes within the next two years.

[TheMan]

I see the OP just abandoned this thread after he got hit with stats and facts:oldlol:

Fail thread failed

[raiderfan19]

Btw Kevin I didn't say Romney was right, I said joe was right.

As to the my views on the 40s threw 70s and them being socialistic ill say this, while I generally support lower taxes and a small government, if we are going to have a big government we have to pay for it. Since that is the case taxes need to be higher not lower. That to me is the real failing of the current republican party. They want to lower taxes but don't curtail spending. You can't do one without the other. This is the same issue I had with the brinksmanship on the debt ceiling. The argument about if we could lower taxes isn't even about whether or not we should pay for all the stuff we are doing now, it's if we should pay for all the stuff we have done/gotten in the last decade.

[johndeeregreen]

I haven't been following this nonsense at all. Does Romney have an actual shot here?

[longhornfan1234]

I haven't been following this nonsense at all. Does Romney have an actual shot here?


Yes... Romney will win easily.

[Real Men Wear Green]

I haven't been following this nonsense at all. Does Romney have an actual shot here?
He has to destroy Obama in the debates and/or the economy has to take another nose-dive while he starts making more sense. If trends continue he'll just take the deep red states and lose big by electoral count, maybe 50-45 by percentage points.

[Sarcastic]

Btw Kevin I didn't say Romney was right, I said joe was right.

As to the my views on the 40s threw 70s and them being socialistic ill say this, while I generally support lower taxes and a small government, if we are going to have a big government we have to pay for it. Since that is the case taxes need to be higher not lower. That to me is the real failing of the current republican party. They want to lower taxes but don't curtail spending. You can't do one without the other. This is the same issue I had with the brinksmanship on the debt ceiling. The argument about if we could lower taxes isn't even about whether or not we should pay for all the stuff we are doing now, it's if we should pay for all the stuff we have done/gotten in the last decade.


It's not as if the government gave us new entitlements over the past decade and ran up the debt with handouts. The debt was run up from 2 wars that were not budgeted for, and tax cuts for the wealthy.

[brandonislegend]

Who is the favorite right now?

[embersyc]

Who is the favorite right now?

http://www.gallup.com/poll/157508/romney-support-among-lowest-income-voters.aspx

[KevinNYC]

I haven't been following this nonsense at all. Does Romney have an actual shot here?

Nate Silver who blogs at 538 has a fairly sophisticated election model based on all available polls and then he runs 50,000 simulations of this computer model and Obama wins 75% of the them.

This model predicted 49 of the 50 states accurately in 2008 and the one he missed there was only a 1% margin in the vote.

[Take Your Lumps]

Nate Silver who blogs at 538 has a fairly sophisticated election model based on all available polls and then he runs 50,000 simulations of this computer model and Obama wins 75% of the them.

This model predicted 49 of the 50 states accurately in 2008 and the one he missed there was only a 1% margin in the vote.

Link: http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/

[D-Rose]

Yes... Romney will win easily.
:oldlol:

Obama has the lead, and with the more stupid things Mitt says by the day, he's lowering his chances.

[Blue&Orange]

You realize we've gotten less capitalist not more capitalist recently right
wtf is this shit? What are u trying to say? That only recently people are getting poorer? :roll:

It's one dumbass after another.

[magictricked]

are you really this naive? almost 100% of that 47% are elderly, earn under 20k per year, or pay payroll taxes. The idea that anyone voting for obama doesnt pay taxes is both preposterous and ludicrous. Try and get a realistic perspective.

Here's a chart on how that 47% breaks down

http://www.laobserved.com/biz/2012/09/mapping_out_romneys.php

[KingBeasley08]

democrats and republicans both suck ass. fvck voting

[BEAST Griffin]

The biggest moochers are rich land owners.

[JtotheIzzo]

http://swampland.time.com/2012/09/17/video-captures-uncensored-mitt-romney-at-fundraiser/ :cheers:

Of course some people don't like hearing the truth but I'm glad this got out, shows Romney is just pretending to be a moron to get some of the big government vote. He knows the real deal about mooching and americans who dont take personal responsibility. He's no Ron Paul in terms of integrity, but I'll take him over Barry "handout" Bama

What Romney failed to mention is that a lot of those 47% don't pay tax because of Republican initiatives like tax breaks for students, mothers, service men and women etc.

[L.Kizzle]

democrats and republicans both suck ass. fvck voting
:facepalm

[DirtySanchez]

Romney just handed Obama's second term in a gift basket.
No wonder his own party dislikes him.
He has been mouthing off about Obama splitting the nation in half and now he is caught blowing off 47% of the country.
47% yes includes the poor, disabled, minorities, and single parents aka people he the GOP spits on. But it also includes military service people, veterans, and senior citizens. That group is suppose to be is base.
I can get in to e fact that the so called "moochers" are people who really need help and that the government supporting these people is not the reason why the economy is where it's at.
The whole hand out argument is BS.

[raiderfan19]

wtf is this shit? What are u trying to say? That only recently people are getting poorer? :roll:

It's one dumbass after another.
Where did I say that? Btw I think a lot of you seriously misunderstand capitalism. While in true capitalism(which isn't even what I want because I am in favor of reduced entitlement programs) there would be much less spending on food stamps and the like, there would also be no more oil subsidies or any other of the huge subsidies that large businesses get. It's not nearly as bad for the little guy as its made out to be

[Jailblazers7]

Where did I say that? Btw I think a lot of you seriously misunderstand capitalism. While in true capitalism(which isn't even what I want because I am in favor of reduced entitlement programs) there would be much less spending on food stamps and the like, there would also be no more oil subsidies or any other of the huge subsidies that large businesses get. It's not nearly as bad for the little guy as its made out to be

That is the problem with the GOP's campaign for "capitalism." Most of the campaign is aimed at cutting safety net programs and demonizing lower income individuals as lazy and irresponsible. US politics are just way to polarizing these days.