jaysweet3 wrote:I really have no optomistic side.
"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury. After that, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits with the result the democracy collapses because of the loose fiscal policy ensuing ..."
Whether it is the teacher's union, or other government unions with monopoly on the supply of labor and the political clout to ensure they are compensated (wages, benefits, pensions, paid vacation, non-safety work rules, etc.) not just more than those with the same skills in the free market, but grossly more, creates an economically unsustainable system that will ultimately collapse. And just like a battered spouse, they will lash out at anyone that points out what is wrong.
Ask an old lady how much their grandson owes them for their social security? They will tell you how they paid in (and neglect that they voted for politicians that pissed it away) and ignore that their grand kids will eventually be paying every penny. So they get mad at you since they don't want to admit that they were robbed and simply feel that they are entitled to turn around and rob their grand kids even though there simply are not enough of them to keep the Ponzi scheme alive for much longer.
The list goes on and on. Every one of these over promised, under funded, "entitlements" that people "earned" was precisely people voting to give themselves benefits that someone else would be forced to pay for. With the last election, I think we crossed the point of no return. Bankruptcy is the inevitable end point.
Will it be a Greece-style, or a Venezuela-style, or something else
jaysweet3 wrote:'m not saying that the pubs are innocent, it just costs the taxpayers less.
Politicians are politicians. We just have too many damned fools that think politicians actually care about them. The GOP voters don't get sucked into this nonsense that my politicians care about me nearly as much as the Dem voters. That's the big difference. Politicians will always be politicians. It's just a question of what the voters let them get away with. If you look at Chicago, Detroit, DC, there seems little limits on what the Dem voters will let the Dem politicians get away with. Just look at Derrick Smith or Jesse Jackson, Jr. or ...http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/results/race/president
If you click over to the exit polls, and go down to the "Most Important Candidate Quality" and see that 21% of the population listed "Cares about people" as the most important quality and of them 81% voted for Obama. Who the hell thinks this is the "most important" quality of the President of the United States? Those that felt this way account for a 14% advantage for Obama.
If you look at those exit polls, there is just little reason for hope. And add on top of that all the problems of Illinois
The voters have spoken and they said off the cliff. Illinois giving drivers licenses to criminals is just a symptom and sadly they are not kidding. They really believe this makes sense.
Certainly if you look into in this context it makes sense.DEMOGRAPHY IS DESTINY
Democrats haven't changed anyone's mind. They changed the people.
If the same country that voted in 1980 had voted in 2012, Romney would have won a bigger landslide than Reagan did.
Since 1968, 85 percent of legal immigrants have come from what is euphemistically called "developing countries."
Because recent immigrants have no skills, they arrive in dire need of government assistance. Their desperation has been an enormous boon to the Democratic Party.
Thirty-nine percent of native households receive some form of government assistance. By contrast, 57 percent of immigrant households -- legal immigrants -- get government assistance. We can't do anything about the native population, but why on Earth is America taking in immigrants who require taxpayer support?
If you come to America and immediately go on welfare, by definition, you are not a desirable immigrant. Except as a voter for the Democratic Party.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.