-
Please be sure to read the rules and adhere to them. Some banned members have complained that they are not spammers. But they spammed us. Some even tried to redirect our members to other forums. Duh. Be smart. Read the rules and adhere to them and we will all get along just fine. Cheers. :beer: Link to the rules: https://www.forumsforums.com/threads/forum-rules-info.2974/
Political Quiz Q9
- Thread starter Spiffy1
- Start date
Same answer as the reitrement question. The "Great Society" started by LBJ and grown more by GWB than any president since LBJ, is a failure. Look at what happened in New Orleans as an example; people who are so reliant on government handouts they cannot even "get out of the rain."
[the response that is; the situation: 
]The answer is "Maybe"; once again, it depends. If everyone was like Bob S, no problem. But, as long as there are selfish Scrooge McDucks out there, and as long as there are people in need, government has to supplement what private contributions don't achieve.
First of all, as a compassionate nation, we take care of our own. But, it makes good economic sense to do so, and conservatives should be leading this parade. For example, if we provided adequate housing, we wouldn't have as much illness and disease. If we provided adequate health care, we would prevent much illness and disease. With less illness and disease, our health care costs would drop, and our insurance premiums would go down.
That's just one example. Another is crime; if we devoted more efforts to education and self esteem among young people at risk, we would have less crime, with all of crime's attendant costs, both physical and economic.
Conservatives tend to argue that people should take responsibility for their own actions. Liberals agree, but understand the reality that it isn't always possible without a helping hand. Liberals are willing to extend that helping hand; conservative just wish those in need would "go away" (die).
First of all, as a compassionate nation, we take care of our own. But, it makes good economic sense to do so, and conservatives should be leading this parade. For example, if we provided adequate housing, we wouldn't have as much illness and disease. If we provided adequate health care, we would prevent much illness and disease. With less illness and disease, our health care costs would drop, and our insurance premiums would go down.
That's just one example. Another is crime; if we devoted more efforts to education and self esteem among young people at risk, we would have less crime, with all of crime's attendant costs, both physical and economic.
Conservatives tend to argue that people should take responsibility for their own actions. Liberals agree, but understand the reality that it isn't always possible without a helping hand. Liberals are willing to extend that helping hand; conservative just wish those in need would "go away" (die).