can any forum member ....

can you name one republicon policy that ever helped the middle class? just one?

i'm going to keep this topic bumped to the top so you can always see it...i'd hate for the republicons to miss an opportunity to show us where republicon policy ever helped the working people of this country.

Original Post

Republicans aren't the handout party, they believe you should work for your pay.  Most small business owners are Republicans, that should tell you everything you need to know.  Our Government does not create "jobs", it's the people who endure great financial risk in hopes for a substantial reward who are the job creators.  You ask what does the Republican party does for the middle class?  Simple, they eliminate the democratic idiocy and red tape that hamper job creation and dissuades entrepreneurship.   Democrats believe that government is the end all solution to our financial and job dilema issues.  What they fail to understand is, government is the reason for our financial and job dilema issues.  I'm convinced liberalism is a mental disorder.   Mikey and Jimmy represent them well.

Also, Republicans ended slavery, which prompted the democrats to create the kkk.

The best response I can provide would be to provide some URL's or links to other pages that will address what you are asking as well as some other links that might be interesting:

REPUBLICANS

https://www.quora.com/What-was...-in-the-last-decade#

https://www.reddit.com/r/Polit...ublican_legislative/

https://townhall.com/columnist...lican-party-n1520352

But also there is some info on Democrats which I believe should be cited.

DEMOCRATS

https://townhall.com/columnist...ocrat-party-n1518613

 

Maybe from these links some information can be gleaned.  Often though you cannot attribute legislation to one specific party because both parties share credit and blame because of the need for support from other politicians. 

OldSalt posted:

yes, it was an extension of that act, but it was Eisenhower's idea to construct the autobahn-like system.  Just because a democratic introduced it does not mean it's a democrat policy.

 

And it doesn't mean there were existing plans from 1916, the
Interstate is all Eisenhower.

priceless... not one TRUE republicon policy can be named... now, think real hard... republicons expanded on the highway system, but i asked about a republicon policy that helped the middle class... it shouldn't be so hard to do... watch this...

hey jt.. what's one democrat policy that helped the middle class?

why do republicons always go back to segregation and civil rights..

 since you brought up segregation.. did you know the SCOTUS just ruled that republicon gerrymandering by race isn't legal? imagine that.. the party of 'civil rights' just got told they couldn't draw voting districts up by racial segregation. isn't that a special kind of hypocrisy. you just claimed 'jim crow laws are democrat policy' and the republicons just got caught with their own form of voter jim crow laws...

*i freely admit that democrat policy of that time was segregation and very much anti-civil rights... however, it would take a blind squirrel to claim the republicons of today are the defenders of civil rights or minorities.

Crash.Override posted:

why do republicons always go back to segregation and civil rights.. the very laws that caused the switch in conservative democrats and liberal republicans... civil rights laws caused the parties to basically switch polarities and every human on the planet knows it... except the republicons , when they try to make a point in a discussion. in the last 30 years, name one republicon policy that helped a minority.. hell, since the civil rights of the 60's , name one republicon policy that didn't hurt minorities?

I don't know any minorities that don't have a better life than you.

Republican signed the civil rights into law.

Kraven posted:
Crash.Override posted:

....... it would take a blind squirrel to claim the republicons of today are the defenders of civil rights or minorities.

 

I don't know any minorities that don't have a better life than you.

Republican signed the civil rights into law.

i rest my case. thanks for proving my point.

Crash.Override posted:
Kraven posted:
Crash.Override posted:

....... it would take a blind squirrel to claim the republicons of today are the defenders of civil rights or minorities.

 

I don't know any minorities that don't have a better life than you.

Republican signed the civil rights into law.

i rest my case. thanks for proving my point.

And I guess you haven't heard of the 13th Amendment; but I guess that 19th Century Republicans are still mean spirited and stoopid because they didn't include welfare checks in exchange for votes in that amendment. To you dems, highly melanated peoples are perfect for exploitation in exchange for patronizing welfare but silly repooblicans think they can climb up the economic ladder with hard work and using their minds.

In my opinion, and it's not worth that much, whatever the Democrats did in the past for the Middle Class, everything was eliminated and offset with their passage of Democratic Healthcare Bill (aka Obamacare).  That fiasco was entirely the Democrats making and doing and has created the situation we find ourselves in today.  Cases where often only one Insurance company exist to provide insurance and at enormous rates with intolerable deductibles no one can stand.

Before the Democrats got involved I paid around $130 a month for family coverage which had a $400.00 family deductible after which Insurance paid 80% of most charges.  AFTER Democrats implemented their disaster my family policy went up to $240.00 a moth for coverage but worse, the deductible, rose to an unbelievable $8,000.00 before insurance paid their 80%.

Lets assume my family had $10,000.00 in medical bills which has happened several times and actually more but for this example say $10,000.00 in bills.  Many, a great many families, had far more than $10,000 in expenses so the cost to the family only increased that much more.

BEFORE DEMOCRATS messed with it

$400.00 out of my families pocket before insurance took over$9600.00 charged of which insurance paid 80% so we paid 20% of $9600 or  $1920 out of our pocket so my PRE-Democrat medical cost was $1920 + $400 or a total of $2320.00 in medical expenses plus add to that my cost for the insurance was $130 a month or $1560 a year so total medical expenses for the pre-democratic healthcare was $3880.00 for the year

AFTER DEMOCRATS messed with it

$10,000 in charges ... $8,000.00  out of my families pocket before insurance covered anything.  Insurance paid 80% toward the remaining $2000.00 expenses which meant I paid 20% of the $2000 remaining or $400.00.  So total after Democrat medical cost for treatment was $8400.00.   My cost for medical health insurance also was now $240 a month or  $2880.00 a year.  Total (Thanks to Democrats) family  healthcare cost $ 11,280.00 or an INCREASE of $7,400.00 thanks ENTIRELY to Democrats.

Now from my particular point of view it seemed I, and my family, went from having health insurance to not being covered as our medical cost, direct out of our pocket cost, INCREASED $7,400.00 over what it was BEFORE  the Democrats helped me out.  One other thing I noticed after the Democrats got involved was that two of my personal Doctors left the medicine field and retired solely because of "Obamacare".  I had ask them why they were retiring and that was the reason they gave.

Now you may be trying to say Democrats helped the little guy or the worker or family man but for my Family the Democrats COST ME a lot more than Republicans ever did.  Those figures and cost I can prove and verify because it happened to me, my family, and it happened BECAUSE of Democrats getting involved with healthcare and insurance, not because of Republicans. 

So tell me Crash ... just how am I better off because of what Democrats did?  I guess if I wanted a sex change operation or abortion then it would now be a medical insurance covered event but I don't consider that doing ME or my family any favors.  Democrats said Healthcare meddling was necessary because a few wasn't covered by insurance and they should have been but what the Democrats EFFECTIVLY did was to make it as if multitudes more (many more millions) essentially didn't have health insurance protection against medical cost that they would incur.  The extremely high deductibles that these (more expensive) insurance policies now carried meant that essentially it was like a family NOT having insurance anymore.

You ask what Republicans have done for the middle class I'm asking how this Democratic invention and meddling helped out the middle class and families like mine?  I await your reply!

Democrat Party -- all to protect their power and wealth -- ordered a death march across one-third of the nation for indigenous peoples, ripped the nation asunder causing the slaughter of 675,000 Americans, sent tens of thousands of innocents to concentration camps supposedly as enemy aliens (but profited from buying their property at cut rate prices), assassinated over 1,500 Republicans, and destroyed the economies of our large cities to ensure votes and power (crime ridden, drug fueled ghettoes with schools planned to fail). 

so, not one republicon policy since the civil rights movement... which caused a split in both parties and caused a swap in democrat and republicon platforms, have the republicons done anything to help the middle class... that's the bottom line.  how's that feel? you have to go back 50+ years to find a republicon policy that was put in to help the middle class.  that is contrary to everything the republicons post, on these forums. and it's FACT.

From a 2006 article:

"

But good news like that had been a long time in coming. The link between family breakdown and poverty had been noticed much earlier than the 1990s. In 1965, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, then Assistant Secretary of Labor, published a report that noticed a disturbing trend in the black community in America. Despite desegregation and efforts to ensure equal opportunity, welfare dependence was on the rise among blacks. Moynihan and his fellow researchers pointed to the disintegration of family as a major cause. But as with many prophets, his message was not very welcome at the time and went largely unheeded. Here is a paragraph of warning from the Moynihan Report:

Indices of dollars of income, standards of living, and years of education deceive. The funda­mental problem is that of family structure. The evidence is that the Negro family in the urban ghettos is crumbling. A middle-class group has managed to save itself, but for vast numbers of the unskilled, poorly educated, city working class the fabric of conventional social relationships has all but disintegrated. So long as this situation persists, the cycle of poverty and disadvantage will continue to repeat itself.[1]"

Those words, regrettably, have proved all too true. When the Moynihan Report was released, one out of four black children was born to an unwed mother. Forty years later, two out of three black children are born outside of marriage.

www.heritage.org/poverty-and-i...e-welfare-dependence

Later, Patrick Moynihan would become senator Moynihan and strike the same clarion call, which seems prescient today.  The Democrats rewarded him with cries of racist.  The same old refuge of cornered Democrats.  Tell an inconvenient truth and they will call you a racist or fascist.  Patrick Moynihan, the second most intelligent man to hold office in the Senate. Thomas Jefferson being the most intelligent. 

Democrats spread the myth that the parties switched identities in the 1960s or so.  That's a myth, propaganda repeated over and over, aka a Big Lie.

The Dems moved minorities off the plantations or, later, shareholder shacks to the cities.  Using the old political machine methods used for early immigrants, the Dems ensnared the minorities with welfare and such to ensure votes. View the large cities managed for decades by Democrats, minorities in ghettoes, fueled by drugs and cheap booze, poor schools, with few options but for the best to escape, the rest to exist in some version of criminality or poor paying jobs.  If, there were only a few instances, such could be called happenstance. For it to be the rule involves conscious choices by the Democrat politicians -- parasites, the lot of them. 

 

direstraits posted:

Democrats spread the myth that the parties switched identities in the 1960s or so.  That's a myth, propaganda repeated over and over, aka a Big Lie.

The Dems moved minorities off the plantations or, later, shareholder shacks to the cities.  Using the old political machine methods used for early immigrants, the Dems ensnared the minorities with welfare and such to ensure votes. View the large cities managed for decades by Democrats, minorities in ghettoes, fueled by drugs and cheap booze, poor schools, with few options but for the best to escape, the rest to exist in some version of criminality or poor paying jobs.  If, there were only a few instances, such could be called happenstance. For it to be the rule involves conscious choices by the Democrat politicians -- parasites, the lot of them. 

 

Dems have a long history of using "the public good" as a cover for their real motive, political power used to enrich themselves. Take the first "gun control" act in the US - the Sullivan Act as an example. The act was named after the Tammany Hall crook Timothy Sullivan who introduced the legislation partly to be seen as protecting genteel polite society and partly to actually protect the Tammany Hall gangs from themselves and their victims.

The father of New York gun control was Democratic city pol “Big Tim “Sullivan — a state senator and Tammany Hall crook, a criminal overseer of the gangs of New York.

In 1911 — in the wake of a notorious Gramercy Park blueblood murder-suicide — Sullivan sponsored the Sullivan Act, which mandated police-issued licenses for handguns and made it a felony to carry an unlicensed concealed weapon.

This was the heyday of the pre-Prohibition gangs, roving bands of violent toughs who terrorized ethnic neighborhoods and often fought pitched battles with police. In 1903, the Battle of Rivington Street pitted a Jewish gang, the Eastmans, against the Italian Five Pointers. When the cops showed up, the two underworld armies joined forces and blasted away, resulting in three deaths and scores of injuries. The public was clamoring for action against the gangs.

Problem was the gangs worked for Tammany. The Democratic machine used them as shtarkers (sluggers), enforcing discipline at the polls and intimidating the opposition. Gang leaders like Monk Eastman were even employed as informal “sheriffs,” keeping their turf under Tammany control.

The Tammany Tiger needed to rein in the gangs without completely crippling them. Enter Big Tim with the perfect solution: Ostensibly disarm the gangs — and ordinary citizens, too — while still keeping them on the streets.

In fact, he gave the game away during the debate on the bill, which flew through Albany: “I want to make it so the young thugs in my district will get three years for carrying dangerous weapons instead of getting a sentence in the electric chair a year from now.”

Sullivan knew the gangs would flout the law, but appearances were more important than results. Young toughs took to sewing the pockets of their coats shut, so that cops couldn’t plant firearms on them, and many gangsters stashed their weapons inside their girlfriends’ “bird cages” — wire-mesh fashion contraptions around which women would wind their hair.

Ordinary citizens, on the other hand, were disarmed, which solved another problem: Gangsters had been bitterly complaining to Tammany that their victims sometimes shot back at them.

http://nypost.com/2012/01/16/t...rth-of-nys-gun-laws/

I have always had good health insurance, but I haven't had it for $130 a month since the early 70s. Yes, I did pay for it too. It came out of my pay before I got any money.

The thing that helped the middle class out more than anything else was unions. The republicans never passed or favored a bill that helped unions.  Too many blue collar workers have been brainwashed into believing they don't need a union, the company will take care of them.

jtdavis posted:

I have always had good health insurance, but I haven't had it for $130 a month since the early 70s. Yes, I did pay for it too. It came out of my pay before I got any money.

The thing that helped the middle class out more than anything else was unions. The republicans never passed or favored a bill that helped unions.  Too many blue collar workers have been brainwashed into believing they don't need a union, the company will take care of them.

Unions have always been a double edged sword that has cut both the target (business owners) and its owner (the workers). When used correctly like the old medieval craft guilds, it makes sure that workers receive proper compensation for their work and society is the better for their presence. When used incorrectly to rob business owners of their just profits and protect shoddy performers, businesses close or move and communities suffer.

For the reason that unions can both be good and bad, I believe most republicans are ambivalent about unions and try to stay out of labor-management disputes.

trump was elected on a string of broken promises and sound bites... he played the game of telling people what the wanted to hear and knew full well he was lying to them.... he's still doing it today... and 1/3 of the country can't see the forest for the trees and 50% of the republicon party would vote for putin over any democrat.  the excuse 'russiagate is because democrats are sore losers' is a prime example... if the investigation is caused by sore loser democrats... then why did it start 6 months before the election?

Kraven posted:

crash

50% of the republicon party would vote for putin over any democrat. 

---------------

Putin would be better to control gingham heads, dems are
too stupid,,, shut up... you've already proven that time after time.

 

this is a prime example of the bigotry and hatred that makes up the republicon party. you poor little snowflake. can you find your safe place?

The public sector unions have betrayed their own members.  Cities', counties' and states' pension funds are running short.  A major reason is that the governments failed to deposit their share of the pension funds. Unions, instead of shouting bloody murder, kept quiet.  

Cities', counties' and states' pension funds are running short.  A major reason is that the governments failed to deposit their share of the pension funds.

I assume you think this is the unions and workers fault. Surely the government would not reneig on their promises.

jtdavis posted:

Cities', counties' and states' pension funds are running short.  A major reason is that the governments failed to deposit their share of the pension funds.

I assume you think this is the unions and workers fault. Surely the government would not reneig on their promises.

They already are, where have you been?  Its the union leaders fault for not looking after them members. They should have been shouting from the rooftops and threatening to tell members of the danger and to vote for politicians who would keep their promises.  

Add Reply

Likes (0)

×
×
×
×