News Reasons To Vote For Kerry: Things He Will Do To Improve America

[russ_watters]

It's very important to me, too. It's important to a lot of people who aren't Republicans, believe it or not.

...I don't believe in hand-outs either--God knows I never got a free ride.

Could you explain this in light of your assertion that McDonald's should pay adults more money for doing the same job as kids? It appears contradictory.

There are people out there, however, who aren't as intelligent, or have physical or mental limitations. Are they somehow worth less as people because they didn't own a house when they were 30, or because they're adults and have a minimum wage job?

If by "worth less" you mean is the job they do worth less than the job a doctor (for example) does, then absolutely.

But there are lots of people who aren't quite smart enough to succeed in college and become doctors or lawyers. They have jobs, and they work just as hard as you and I do. They don't deserve to be screwed over.

So these people deserve handouts? I thought you said you don't believe in handouts?

Be thankful that you've been gifted with enough intelligence and enough drive to make a comfortable life for yourself, and stop ripping on everyone else who isn't quite that fortunate.

How is expecting people to do work worthy of their pay "ripping on" people? Are you saying that those who aren't intelligent or driven enough to "make a comfortable life" should get handouts?

 

[Elizabeth1405]

Personal attacks and name calling are not allowed. I looked yesterday when you mentioned this and could not find the post, the poster may have thought better of it and edited it out.

You may report a post if you feel it is inappropriate and a mentor will take action if necessary.

You may want to double-check on that. I just did, and the post is still there. It is the third from the last post on on "Why Bush Should Not be Re-Elected." (submitted by loseyourname).

Thank you for your cooperation.

 

[Artman]

I am not "name-calling" by calling someone elitist.

Sorry, I disagree. It's a deroggatory label.

If you want to take on the subject of name-calling, perhaps you (and the moderators of this forum) should deal with the individual who called someone a "dickhead" in another thread yeasterday.

And did it further their argument, or just make them look immature?

Ooops, I forgot, that person is right-wing just like you, so they can say whatever they want and get away with it.

I don't align myself politically with either side, but I guess I do tend toward the right in some things.

I am not required to respond to you about my beliefs.

Of course you're not. I asked you to do so, I am interested in your opinion (believe it or not).

Why? For one, you cannot tell me what to do. Second, no matter what I say it will be ripped to shreds (with arguments supported by skewed sources and biased websites), I will be misquoted, and nothing will come of it. Why should I bother wasting my time arguing for nothing? Thanks, but I've got better things to do. Come November, I will be voting for John Kerry, and you will be voting for Cowboy George. I'm not going to change your mind, and you're not going to change mine. End of story.

If you had read my previous posts in this thread, you would see that I am trying to approach this question with an open mind. I do not vote based on a party leaning or slanted bias. I never have. If I feel Mr Kerry would be a better President then Mr Bush, he would get my vote.

What I am asking is for strongly based opinions and backup that can convince me that Mr. Kerry can do at least some of what he has promised. I am serious in this. I have given a website that lists Mr Kerry's Bills proposed to the Senate many of which I agree with in principle, but most of which are caught up in committees. I can see that Mr Kerry appears to be a decent man, but what I am asking is: can he accomplish his goals?

 

[loseyourname]

https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=273809&postcount=81

Right there. I got a little frustrated at being patronized by a forum full of people that don't answer questions, and I quickly apologized. What's worse for the forum? That, or harping on about someone mistakenly thinking you once worked at McDonald's for three pages.

 

[loseyourname]

By the way, while we're still on the subject of false assumptions, I do not consider myself right-wing. My positions on economics and social welfare are right-wing (and these are very important issues to me), but outside of that, I'm fairly liberal, especially on the environment and civil liberties. I didn't vote for Bush in the last election and I have no idea who I'm voting for in this one, though I am leaning Bushward.

 

[russ_watters]

Sorry, I disagree. It's a deroggatory label.

So do I, but I'm letting it go. I recommend everyone else do the same.

 

[Elizabeth1405]

What's worse for the forum? That, or harping on about someone mistakenly thinking you once worked at McDonald's for three pages.

Yup, it's all my fault that you used foul language. You got me there. Actually, I trust the wonderful moderators of this forum will delete your post, as many of us find that kind of language offensive. Thank you!

 

[loseyourname]

It's deleted. I will apologize for a second time, despite the fact that you never even posted in that particular thread. I obviously had no intention of offending you.

 

[loseyourname]

Yup, it's all my fault that you used foul language. You got me there.

Wait! I know the answer to this one. Can you quote me on that? I never said that.

 

[russ_watters]

Once again, Russ, please quote me where I said that. I said they don't deserve to be screwed over--I did not say they they deserve handouts. Those two phrases do not mean the same thing.

I am not required to respond to you about my beliefs.

Here's the problem Elizabeth. You make statements that honestly do seem to say one thing, but you aren't explicit and you refuse to be explicit about what you mean. Maybe its unintentional and maybe not, but either way, it appears dishonest. If you do wish for honest debate, you can help avoid getting yourself upset about us misinterpreting you by being specific about what your opinion is. Make specific, positive statements of your opinion. Otherwise, further debate is utterly useless: instead of saying "I did not say that" when asked a question, answer the question. Insead of saying 'I don't believe this' and 'I don't believe that' tell us what you do believe.

At this point, whether we continue the debate and perhaps clear up misunderstandings about each other (and God forbid, maybe reach some common ground) is up to you.

 

[Evo]

Let's see if we can get this thread back to the original topic "Things Kerry will do", or I will close the thread.

 

[Artman]

Originally Posted by amp
1. Kerry will balance the budget.
2. Kerry will give the US a stronger and more improved military.
3. Kerry will bring back our allies.
4. Kerry will bring about almost universal healthcare.
5. Kerry will reform and revialize our public education.
6. Kerry will accomplish the mission in Iraq and bring our troops home with honor.
to be cont...

Artman, you want my beliefs? Here they are above, well-said and concisely put by amp. Good enough for you? Buh-bye.

Thank you.

Now don't get hot over this. These are not attacks on your opinion, these are serious questions from someone who wants the get at the facts.

Can either Elizabeth1405 or Amp or someone else give me some basis for these beliefs other than Mr. Kerry's word that he might accomplish some of these?

For instance, has he proposed in his platform a method for achieving items 1 and 2 together? The two are often mutually exclusive.

Items 3 & 5 he may be able to accomplish, but what are his proposed methods?

How does he intend to pay for Item 4?

Item 6 seems to me well within his capabilities. I also believe this to be important to him.

 

[loseyourname]

Is John Kerry making it up as he goes along? The presumptive Democratic nominee, who has been raging about the Bush economy for more than 15 months, was recently asked to tie his campaign proposals into a succinct and compelling agenda. "Succinct agenda," Mr. Kerry replied. "We're going to balance the budget. We're going to cut the deficit in half in four years. We're going to create 10 million jobs. And we're going to provide health care to all Americans? How's that?" Well, which is it going to be? Are you going to balance the budget? Or are you going to cut the deficit in half? The difference is only about $250 billion a year.

Full Article

 

[russ_watters]

Evo - fair enough.

[switching gears]

Artman & loseyourname - money for proposed spending is always a toughie for both sides. Healthcare, defense, and balancing the budget require more income for the government or cuts in other places. When Kerry says things like the quote above and also says he'll "roll back" already in place cuts, what I'm hearing is that with him in office we'll have some major tax increases.

 

[loseyourname]

I'm reading over his site right now, trying to figure out exactly what his economic plan is, but it's still pretty vague. There are a couple of things that just don't make any sense, though.

- He says he'll bring jobs back to America by closing tax loopholes for overseas employees. But even that is done, overseas wages will still be so much lower that it will still be more profitable to ship unskilled jobs overseas.

- He says he will create jobs and encourage investment by lowering corporate taxes for 99% of all businesses, but this will not increase the deficit. In fact, his plan will take in an additional $12 billion each year. The only way to do this is to tax the hell out of the largest corporations, which are the ones investing the most money and creating the most jobs.

- He says he'll cut health-care premiums by $1000. What does this mean? $1000 per year per worker? There's another tax increase, but is this part of the increase for the top 1% of businesses, or the top 2% of households.

- Back to the cutting of business taxes. Does he realize that the owners of the more successful 99% of businesses for whom he is cutting taxes are often in the top 1% of income earners? Cutting their taxes in one place and raising them in another isn't going to do a whole lot of good. It certainly isn't going to create any new jobs.

- He'll create universal access to college by giving a tax credit of up to $4000 for 4 years. Why? The Hope credit already goes up to $6000 for 4 years. A student can make $1000 in a year working a minimum wage job for 4 hours a week. If anything, expand federal work study programs.

- He says he'll lower corporate taxes by 5%. First off, this is a bit misleading (or at least ambiguous), as he is lowering it from 35 to 33.25%, not to 30%. I'd still kind of like to know how lowering corporate taxes like this is going to generate an additional $12 billion of revenue, but he doesn't seem interested in explaining how he will achieve all of these things.

- One final thing he doesn't mention is that all of these proposals can only be achieved through legislation. If congress remains Republican, how the heck is he going to get any of this passed?

 

[amp]

Well Artman and LYN, he has given you and US an overview of what and how he intends to go about accomplishing those goals, I'd say that's sincere, just and fair. This is more than the head of the current admin was providing at the same relative point in his first run.

Kerry's record if undistinguished is moderately good and shows the he fought for many things we 'average joes' feel would benefit us.

Contrasted against the incumbent, you see someone out of touch with 'joe average' and the larger portion of the population.

Kerry knows this is the only planet we have to live on at present so he sees the crucial importance of ecological wisdom for the current generation and generations yet to come.

The incumbent, well its no secret.

 

[Artman]

Thank you Amp.

Kerry's record if undistinguished is moderately good and shows the he fought for many things we 'average joes' feel would benefit us.

This seems to be true.

This also seems to be true:

- One final thing he doesn't mention is that all of these proposals can only be achieved through legislation. If congress remains Republican, how the heck is he going to get any of this passed?

Thank you for the information on Kerry's platform loseyourname.

 

[amp]

This also seems to be true:
Quote:

Originally Posted by loseyourname
- One final thing he doesn't mention is that all of these proposals can only be achieved through legislation. If congress remains Republican, how the heck is he going to get any of this passed?

Thank you for the information on Kerry's platform loseyourname.

LYN, pardon me for not opting for pessimism which would increase the work in a already difficult task, finging and building a foundation from a base of common ground. The Rep's are desirous of many of the beneficial projections of the Kerry initiatives. As Obama stated better than I could, there is no liberal or conservative, we are Americans who stand/work/progress united in our efforts to strengthen and revitalize the spirit of America.

 

[loseyourname]

The whole point is that none of the parts of his platform I listed here would be of any benefit. No Republican or Democrat should vote for any of them.

 

[amp]

...none of the parts of his platform I listed here would be of any benefit. No Republican or Democrat should vote for any of them.

Really? Why are you so certain? I guess like the 'Shadow' you must "know what lurks in the hearts of men."

 

[nbo10]

The only thing we need to know about Kerry is that during his time in the senate he voted against every major weapon system that we currently use to defend your country.

Ohhh, but wait... I think he now supports all the systems. Do you believe in his actions or what he says in hindsight?

The number one job the president is to protect and defend the US. President Bush has shown that he has the conviction to stand against what the mainstream media and left think is right. By liberating Iraq we ensure that the tyrannical government can not lanuch an attack on the US or any other country. We are also ensured that WMD will not be devolped in Iraq and passed on to terrorist organizations. The windfall of democracy in Iraq & Afganistan will be felt in all parts of the mideast and the world. The ramifications of which will be enjoyed by future generations.

JMD

 

[JohnDubYa]

LYN, pardon me for not opting for pessimism which would increase the work in a already difficult task, finging and building a foundation from a base of common ground. The Rep's are desirous of many of the beneficial projections of the Kerry initiatives. As Obama stated better than I could, there is no liberal or conservative, we are Americans who stand/work/progress united in our efforts to strengthen and revitalize the spirit of America.

Time to put the boots on as it is getting a little deep around here.

 

[Dissident Dan]

The only thing we need to know about Kerry is that during his time in the senate he voted against every major weapon system that we currently use to defend your country.

Do you get all your information from TV ads?

 

[amp]

I don't think so nbo10 . Kerry (IMHO) intends to cut the waste in the military and to produce systems that mesh and blend into a more robust military, unlike the way the public's investment has been abused by shall I say greed mongers.

This is hilarious:

...By liberating Iraq we ensure that the tyrannical government can not lanuch an attack on the US or any other country.

Iraq was less of a threat before the invasion than North Korea. Iraq could barely support itself.

 

[JohnDubYa]

Iraq could barely support itself.

So they had very few weapons, is that your assertion? Historically, nations that are nearly destitute are very dangerous. In fact, such seems to be the norm.