33 Uncomfortable Questions for Progressives

[Revmitchell]

1. Why is it fine that Americans need to prove to the IRS that they have health insurance, but it’s wrong to ask immigrants if they are in the country legally?

2. Why is it okay if a welfare state office asks people for ID before giving them a check, but it’s “racist” to ask people to show IDs before voting for politicians who send out those checks?

14. Why does the U.S. have a Department of Homeland Security that spies on American websites, but lets millions of illegal immigrants overstay their visas and cross the borders?

16. Why are we creating a massive surveillance state to protect us from “terrorism,” when the Obama administration won’t even call the mass murder of U.S. soldiers at Ft. Hood by a confessed jihadist “terrorism”?


20. How much government debt is too much? Can the government accrue tens of trillions in future debt without negative consequences for people?

29. Is it really “progressive” to return to a state of affairs that America was founded to protect people against?

30. How come all of the “compassionate” programs of Democrat-dominated cities across the nation seem to lead only to worsening poverty, drug use and crime?

31. If democracy means “rule of the people,” why does the “Democratic Party” keep giving power to 536 individuals to decide the health, education, energy, transportation, retirement, employment, and income choices for hundreds of millions of people?










http://www.ijreview.com/2013/09/82055-33-uncomfortable-questions-progressives-good-answers/

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

 

[church mouse guy]

I like this question:

6. If all cultures are equal, should all Americans value the abuse of women in many Muslim cultures, the abuse of workers in China, or the ill-treatment of gays in Russia?

I heard on the tv show Dare to Love a couple of weeks ago that Islam has forbidden adoption so I am wondering if the west will stop adoption in order to accommodate Islam? The reason for the abolition of adoption was that Muhammad adopted a son and then wanted his wife so the son divorced the wife and Muhammad married her. Islam outlawed adoption in order to prevent that situation again.

http://www.calloflove.org/?i=14650&mid=25

http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Menj/zaynab.htm

 

[SolaSaint]

I think I have heard Obama answer these questions a few times in the past: uhhhhh, mmmmmmm, bbbbbbb, uhmm, duhhh, duhh, uhmm, mmmmmm................................................................................uhm.:thumbs:

 

[go2church]

Unfortunately someone could come up with 33 questions for so called conservatives. For me this highlights that the dominate political parties are both more interested in maintaining control of their position, winning the next election instead of ensuring the continued freedom of its citizens.

 

[Max Fenster]

another embarrassing question: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blo...tm_campaign=generalsocial&utm_medium=facebook

 

[church mouse guy]

Unfortunately someone could come up with 33 questions for so called conservatives. For me this highlights that the dominate political parties are both more interested in maintaining control of their position, winning the next election instead of ensuring the continued freedom of its citizens.

Go ahead, ask away. Conservatives will answer questions. Will Democrats answer questions?

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

another embarrassing question: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blo...tm_campaign=generalsocial&utm_medium=facebook

That's moronic and doesn't even ask a question. Typical of liberals, though, to try to respond to embarrassing questions with drivel having nothing to do with the subject.

Go ahead, ask away. Conservatives will answer questions. Will Democrats answer questions?

In a word, no.

 

[InTheLight]

I do like some (most?) of these sticky questions but some of them are dishonest. Example, #1--who actually says it is wrong to ask immigrants of they are in the country legally? There are many others.

 

[go2church]

Go ahead, ask away. Conservatives will answer questions. Will Democrats answer questions?

Missing the point of my comment. Both parties show more interest in staying in position then making the tough calls actually governing require.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Example, #1--who actually says it is wrong to ask immigrants of they are in the country legally?

I don't have stats to back it up, but I'll guess over half of all liberals would think that is a wrong question to ask.

 

[Revmitchell]

Nothing dishonest about any of them

 

[InTheLight]

Nothing dishonest about any of them

There's a lot of question begging.

6. If all cultures are equal...

7. If the only thing that a nation needed for the people to be happy was for the government to spend money...

12. Can a nation be fundamentally racist...

 

[InTheLight]

Go ahead, ask away. Conservatives will answer questions. Will Democrats answer questions?

Is there a point where the ratio of executive pay to worker pay is excessive?

Should Wall Street executives (who basically trade in paper, ink, and e-docs, read: PRODUCE NOTHING) get the same tax breaks, less tax breaks, or more tax breaks than manufacturers or everyday working folks?

Explain how raising taxes on 5% of business owners, in the amount of roughly $12,000 each, is going to destroy the economy?

 

[Revmitchell]

There's a lot of question begging.

6. If all cultures are equal...

7. If the only thing that a nation needed for the people to be happy was for the government to spend money...

12. Can a nation be fundamentally racist...

None of them.........

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Should Wall Street executives (who basically trade in paper, ink, and e-docs, read: PRODUCE NOTHING) ...

See? This is what's wrong with the liberal mindset. It leads its owners to make asinine statements like this.

http://the-undercurrent.com/why-financiers-on-wall-street-earn-their-wealth/​

In the Yale Daily News two years ago, Ike Swetlitz attempted to legitimize the Occupy Wall Street protesters’ disdain for anyone pursuing wealth through a career in finance. He claims that the Occupiers are not against the earned wealth of innovators like Steve Jobs, because Jobs produces a tangible product. Instead, they are more specifically against the unearned wealth of Wall Street financiers and moneylenders.

What does it mean to produce wealth according the Swetlitz? “Some financial tools and derivatives are far removed from the labor upon which they are based. The people who use these tools seem to merely be manipulating the labor of others, not making money through their own honest work.” His position is: if you create a tangible product, you earn it; it’s the men who shuffle money around who do not.

According to this logic, an individual who raises money for a company to create goods and services is not entitled to the profit earned from those products—the profit belongs only to those who do “honest work.” The premise here is that investing is not honest or laborious.

Investment bankers provide a vital service in an advanced and productive society: to raise capital and connect people with resources that they wouldn’t ordinarily be able to acquire on their own. Apple would never have gotten off the ground and out of Jobs’ garage if he had not been able to borrow money to produce the prototypes, which then became revolutionary products. Steve Jobs then created massive wealth for anyone owning shares after Apple went public—and this would never had been possible had his investors not taken a risk by loaning him money.

Is it dishonest to be compensated monetarily if the prototypes you financed changed the world? Although financiers are not usually involved in the conceptualization, manufacturing or sales of the product, they provide the necessary capital to make these things happen. Even Steve Jobs did not hand-craft modern Apple products. However, he provided the intellectual and creative capital that pushed his engineers to create their revolutionary products. Financial backers are not too dissimilar in their roles with businesses. They must make the difficult judgment of whether an investment has the prospect to make a profit, and act on their judgment. They provide the seed and the model to produce growth.

Ask any small business owner, entrepreneur, or low-income prospective college student how they would have paid their way if moneylending had been outlawed. What would the world be like if people couldn’t finance their desires, goals, or dreams? For a moneylender to connect capital with an individual pursuing his life goals, the moneylender must have incentive. Just as a carpenter is compensated for his labor on a house, a moneylender should be compensated for the risk he has taken with his money, and be rewarded for the intellectual skill of identifying good investments.

People who don't understand business shouldn't attempt to pass judgment on it.

 

[InTheLight]

Yes, venture capitalists serve a purpose and produce start-up money, so they do produce something. The people that dream up derivatives or gamble on futures are the ones I object to.

People who don't understand business shouldn't attempt to pass judgment on it.

I am a business owner, have been for 25 years. Have been minority owner in two other businesses also. Are you a business owner?

 

[church mouse guy]

Is there a point where the ratio of executive pay to worker pay is excessive?

Should Wall Street executives (who basically trade in paper, ink, and e-docs, read: PRODUCE NOTHING) get the same tax breaks, less tax breaks, or more tax breaks than manufacturers or everyday working folks?

Explain how raising taxes on 5% of business owners, in the amount of roughly $12,000 each, is going to destroy the economy?

On the question of the ratio of executive pay to worker pay, the iron law of wages says that wages will be pressed to the floor. Workers pay is not based upon how much the bosses make. If the bosses make less than the workers, should the workers have their pay cut?

On the question of taxes, we all know that the power to tax is the power to destroy. We don't need more government of any kind. We need less government on all levels. Therefore we need less taxes. That $12,000 could go towards hiring another worker for the business if the government did not take it for who knows what.

Paperwork is real work also. All government is the government of the rich, for the rich and by the rich. Mammon is an unjust god. Big government is also unjust. A lot of that paperwork is required by government as redtape. The best thing to do is reduce regulation and lower taxes across the board.

 

[Revmitchell]

It doesn't matter what the ratio to execs to worker pay is. They offer a salary, you accept it or don't. If you do then put in a full honest days work and stop the griping. If you find a better employment elsewhere then take it. Either way people need to quit being envious of what others have or are doing. That is the evil the far left like Obama and some on this board cheerlead for evy and it is unbiblical.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

I am a business owner, have been for 25 years. Have been minority owner in two other businesses also. Are you a business owner?

Yes, I am. Before I got my psychology degrees, I built houses. Now I am in private practice as an LAC and LMFC. I have benefited from investors and venture capitalists who invested in ideas, who judged my endeavors worthy of investment based on the likelihood of success. If you have been successful for 25 years, so have you, whether you realize it or not.

What I'm seeing you claim is the people who raise venture capital for you through investments, which lead to the ability of your bank to lend you money, don't earn their profits? Is that right?

Really?