Dear Republican,
If I say the word taxes you will have a coronary, so perhaps I will whisper...revenue.
Quit grabbing for your chest and listen to me for a second. Breathe.
Paying taxes is not evil. You can conjure images of colonists tossing crates into the harbor  if you want to, but they were not receiving the benefits of the taxes they were being asked to pay, and said taxes were exorbitant  which is not the case here in the 21st century. So let go of that image will you?
It comes down to something much simpler. I  pride myself that I live in a country and a society that respects and looks after its most vulnerable citizens, the elderly, the disabled, the single moms, the poor, the infirm. These are the people who benefit from Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, Planned Parenthood. And just because the baby boomers are all aging out in this decade does not mean that the current president is responsible. Timing is everything, after all.
Truth is, at one time we had a surplus and things like this were not issues that anyone gave much thought too, that is except for the baby boomers themselves who were actually looking forward to retirement at one time. They could see the writing.
About revenue. You do know it is the making of money right? It is the taking in of monies to pay for expenses. You do get that, right? 
How does a government generate revenues one might ask, and the one asking would be in idiot because the plain answer is...taxes. That is pretty much how it works. It is Economics 101.
It is Humanity 101.
I have a friend. She is 88. She served in World War 2. Her husband walked out on her after 32 years of marriage. She never worked. She never even drove. The divorce laws then were, to say the least, inequitable. She didn't get any of his pension. She didn't get a cut of his non -existent 401k. She barely got alimony. She had no work experience. His second wife of two years got everything.
She lives on $700 a month--that is for everything. She relies on all of the services you are threatening to cut. She has given up. Living in poverty is no fun. She would rather be dead she says.
She served on a Naval base and the time she spent there, signing papers that insured that men would be shipped out--"sent to die" she now says, took a toll on her. Now at the twilight of her life, dying of colon cancer, she identifies with her service to her country. Other than raising her children it is all she talks about. It is who she is.
Spending on wars we could not afford is what got us to this place. Maybe quit posturing and get real. People's lives are at stake--not that they will die--but that their attitudes, their perceptions of their country, and how it treats its citizens will be forever changed.
This is not who we are. We take care of our own, even if it means closing  tax loopholes for the hugest earners on the planet. Maybe, just maybe they should not be able to declare their yacht as a second residence just because it has a bathroom. Just saying.
I have a friend who teases me about being a bleeding heart liberal. He says, you might as well take a portion of your paycheck and just give it to your friend.
Truth is, I a second, because right now she needs it more than I do. 
I am a Democrat, and this is what we do.

Quintesse Quintesse
51-55, F
20 Responses Jul 13, 2011

How awful for her.I send her good thoughts.GREAT POST!

Dear Blue, <br />
You're on.<br />
As luck would have it I am a fairly reasonable person just teeming with allegories(?) I can't wait to use to illustrate my point. Unfortunately the Tea Party is not fiction, it is very, very real, and they take themselves very, very seriously and they are very, very powerful in some ways.<br />
I am sorry if some of us on the left view them as fictional characters, but we do so because we actually DO understand the facts, and more importantly the ramifications of such a radical ideology. (although it might have been fun--the whole default thing--too bad we didn't go for it. Global economic collapse is a great time for the whole family, now and even for decades to come. Oh well. Maybe next time if they get their way. Something to look forward to I guess.)<br />
Charity starts at home. It's catchy. I agree that it does, and I never called anyone a puppy -hater. Who could hate a puppy?--but I certainly implied that my friend had an attitude problem, and he is not alone. There is a pervasive and insidious belief among a certain segment of the population (just for arguments sake I will refer to them as Republicans) who believe that there is an underclass of lazy and undeserving people whose life's dream is to subsist on other people's "donations", that is, other people's hard earned money, in the form of taxes which ultimately pay for programs set up for those less fortunate and in need--the elderly/veterans/orphans. Puppies are excluded because it is agreed that no one could hate them, but old people and homeless vets and even orphans tend to fly under the radar--if only they could bark. I'd insert a sophomoric retort here if I only I could think of one but apparently I used up all my good ones in previous comments. Give me a minute though. One will come to me.<br />
Thanks for agreeing that "taxation without representation" has "SOME" merit. C'mon, tell the truth--you're a history teacher. I aced history, so thanks for the kudos there. Some truth, yeah. Of course the colonies were represented--by subjects sent over to enforce the laws. Now that you think about it, it was great---they didn't have to go through all the rigmarol of an election to decide how they were going to be represented. It was a time-saver really, when you think about it. I don't know what they were complaining about. Something about wanting to keep their (hard-earned) money and how they resented having to give it to the king who could spend it any which way he chose, or just keep it for himself. I get that. Told you--an A.<br />
And these days we still pay taxes--but wait--we get to say how they get spent. We elect people to work all that out for us, we agree to the programs and how they will be funded, and who the recipients will be. Does that system need to be reformed? Absolutely. But to suggest that every person who takes advantage is undeserving and out to "steal" your money is anathema to the concept of the "greater good" which is where the gauntlet has been thrown.<br />
I'll pick it up.<br />
I DO pay taxes but I know you guys love to throw around that 47% don't pay taxes thing. The statistics shift from day to day--but as you accused me of doing--it sure does get the ba<x>se riled! Facts be damned! Want to know why so few people seem to be paying their fair share of taxes? It's because a great majority of people pay their taxes in the form of investment, payroll or excise taxes, not to mention municipal and state taxes. Since middle income families (public workers for example, firefighters, police, farmers, clergy, teachers, you know that $35,000-$58,000 crowd) are family people they usually qualify for family rebates which brings the amount they owe in FEDERAL taxes down to almost nothing. I don't think children qualify as loopholes in most people's minds. Anyway that's where that number comes from. It is a thorny issue and a complicated one and there are no easy answers except to maybe restructure the tax code so that large earners pay a more substantial amount on the huge sums they earn.<br />
Also, just for the record, there is a box you can check on your tax form where you can donate some of your refund (we always got the maximum taken out of our taxes during the year qualifying for refunds) to different causes and I always donate, so if that qualifies as "above and beyond" what I owed than yes, I have paid more than my fair share. I even donate to help other people meet their tax obligations, (and pay their utility bills.)<br />
I am a compulsive donator. It is a sickness perhaps: The Red Cross, OXFAM, NRDC, NARAL, DNC, Planned Parenthood, food pantries, little league, animal shelters, veterans organizations, local police, firefighters, rescue squads, cheerleaders, World Wildlife Fund, PBS, NJN, Audubon...<br />
Why I hardly have any money left. But if I had one penny and you needed it, I'm afraid I would swallow it before I would give it to you.<br />
Only kidding. Here, take it.

Oh, go on.<br />
Haha. Thank you. The truth is, I have been refuting Republicans my whole life. Once I even got paid for my opinion. In my mind that makes me a professional refuter.<br />
And I like Boozer, but I don't think he's too crazy about me. Oh well. <br />

Well, Quint -- It has been a long time ( if not ever) that I have heard ANYONE so aptly and abley slice and dice a typical republican line of rhetoric! Congratulations!! Perhaps boozer is NOT exactly a "typical Republican" , after all, he did almost maintain a modicum of civility when faced with decisive refutation of his specious claims and insulting assumptions.

Well, the next year or so should be pretty interesting politically. Personally I enjoy it all--even the bizarre side-shows. I get a little riled, definitely, but if I didn't, it wouldn't be any fun. I have no patience for apathy, which is why I like to converse even with people who disagree with me--In fact I particularly like to converse with them; at least they care enough to have a dialogue.<br />
Thanks b

of course, I am your back-up!<br />
<br />
remember - I have no TV, so, my views are largely unbiased. I only read news when my friends guide me there and I do so with the eye on the economics of the issues.<br />
<br />
I believe that there are almost no altruists in the world and every decision is driven by the five finger principle. Count them off on your fingers<br />
<br />
What's<br />
in <br />
it<br />
for<br />
me.<br />
<br />
If you want to force a correlation and bias, then I am mixed blood just like your president. Let me say this. I know many black people and many mixed people who are total idiots and ********. Some of them are aquaintances and some are family.<br />
<br />
I will not defend a black man because of the colour of his skin. I said it in the pre-election period and here it is again.<br />
<br />
Whomever becomes president inherits a chronically sick baby in this economy. (me in 2008) <br />
<br />
You will have to nurse your nation back to health by working together and around the clock.

"Furthermore, the economic mess is almost never the doing of the present government as it takes more than one political session to screw it up this much and it will take more than one to fix it"<br />
<br />
Exactly. President Obama is just the punching bag, taking the hits for what the Bush administration did for 8 horrendously long years. Still they claim he "drove this economy into a ditch..." How dare they.<br />
I appreciate your assessment b. Your attention to detail was needed here and greatly appreciated. I tend to speak grandiosely in rather vague terms because I get jammed up with specifics like tax rates and monetary figures (cannot wrap my head around anything larger than one million--and neither can the people who throw around those figures like 14.5 Billion--they just don't admit it--I do.)<br />
But mostly I resent the implication that the government is the enemy. I also shudder at violent images such as guns to heads--but Republicans like to use them. It adds an undercurrent of fierceness to their argument that they seem to get off on. <br />
And I also get the moral superiority thing a lot too. I have a republican friend who suggests that Republicans tend to think fiscally while Democrats think emotionally. That is not necessarily true but they like to say it because it makes them seem like the grown ups and it makes us appear to be the babies, sitting in the corner whining. <br />
I get myself into these situations fairly regularly. It is nice to have some back-up now and then though. Thanks.

Hey, I saw my name and I did not know I was about to be beaten or hugged.<br />
<br />
The Americans that I speak to fight the Medicare bill and the this bill, and the that bill and they use the Mexican migration/workers to argue for them. <br />
<br />
FACT<br />
You have 350m plus people there<br />
The poor will always be with us and they are not all Mexicans<br />
Give alms when you can<br />
<br />
The economic system - The government is a PUBLIC SERVANT. It is installed to serve by administering certain elements that would be too inefficient if it were to be done individually by each household. Among these are <br />
<br />
defence<br />
policing<br />
dirt collection<br />
sewage treatment<br />
hospitals/healthcare<br />
education<br />
etc<br />
<br />
The only income that government has is from taxes in the form of<br />
personal tax<br />
company tax<br />
import duties<br />
export duties<br />
special levies and taxes<br />
<br />
This income must be enough to cover the expenses which never diminish. This administration must report to and be accountable to the nation for its<br />
<br />
budget<br />
expenditure<br />
performance<br />
efficiency in meeting its tasks<br />
<br />
The nation, in turn, must take them to task when they do not perform. The are always methods of censure available to the nation through which it can curb an errant administration.<br />
<br />
Furthermore, the economic mess is almost never the doing of the present government as it takes more than one political session to screw it up this much and it will take more than one to fix it.<br />
<br />
The rich and the conservatives and the "Obama bashers" want to blame the president but the glaring truth is that the past four or so administrations created this monster.<br />
<br />
Austerity measure are coming to the USA even though the rich want to resist it. The rich and the super-rich will evade the problem by moving their wealth to safe havens and have started doing so already.<br />
<br />
So, it is right -nay, imperative, that thinking citizens stand up and be heard.<br />
<br />
We done, Miss Q<br />
<br />
love and peace<br />

I actually do think I have "footing to stand on" but now you've gone and made me mad.<br />
You're right, I am attacking your word choices because your word choices are patently offensive and detract from the discussion we are trying to have. <br />
And just to be clear, I do not consider the collecting of taxes to be a form of charitable contribution. I believe that taxes are collected because I am pretty certain that governments need a form of revenue in order to stay in the business of providing for their citizens in all sorts of ways. <br />
I believe your history of the collapse of governments might be a little over the top, but I am not asking for a clarification on that one mainly because I do not believe that you will be able to give me one and also because I think you're wrong.<br />
I am happy for you that you are an independent business man and I hope you never ever find yourself in need of any kind of assistance such as disability or medicare. I hope that you never want for medical treatment or medication or food or housing. <br />
I do not consider myself morally superior just because I do not refer to my fellow citizens in such derogatory and obviously bitter terms, but I do consider myself more compassionate, because just as you feel that your vantage point is clearer (since you are standing side by side with wage earning people) I feel that where I am standing (next to the disabled and the poor and the elderly and less fortunate) I feel that I have a better understanding of what they go through. <br />
So there you have it. You are defending the wealthy and the greedy and I am defending the disenfranchised and the needy. <br />
Wait a minute...I do feel morally superior now that you mention it.<br />
PS--Government may be inefficient and corrupt, but it can be fixed, so can costs and disbursement issues and debt; it's called compromise and one president in particular that I can think of has been trying to do just that for quite a while now.<br />
PSS--Go ahead, make my day, describe for me a great society that has fallen because of big government, but before you do--define big government. I have my own definition of it in case you're wondering. If we cannot agree on what defines "big" then we will be at a standstill before we even start.<br />
Also--I am not really mad, but I do think as b said--we have hit a nerve with one another--and this nerve, this discussion we are having is the discussion everyone should be having. Trying to understand one another and where we are each coming from is what needs to happen in this country --on a HUGE scale. It is cool that we can at least start here.

<br />
I am a South African and I do not live in the USA.<br />
<br />
People - you no longer lead the world in economic modelling nor in humanity. We no longer respect you as a nation to which to aspire.<br />
<br />
Miss Q<br />
<br />
You are definitely scratching on a wound and they will attack you for your views. <br />
<br />
About Pres Obama - remember that 50-150m adults voted against him. Why should they hide their attitudes when they have a free soapbox here.<br />
<br />
Poverty - If each working person donated $1-10 of his weekly/monthly income then you would xm usd each and every week to fund all the issues<br />
<br />
humbly <br />

I'm laughing at boozer's sob story about how much he's forced to give to the degenerates that didn't have the foresight to be as fortunate as him. With a gun to his head, no less - oh dear!

I always find it interesting that my Republican friends almost unilaterally believe that they work "much harder than the average person." <br />
That attitude stands in the way of a reasonable discussion if you ask me, because the us vs. them line has already been drawn. I don't see things quite that way. I also resent your position that there are those "truly in need" and those that are "parasites." I'm sorry, I just find that offensive although I know it is a popular notion. It may have some merit. but mostly I feel that it is rude.<br />
There will always be some people who look to take advantage of others, people with no moral conscience who are just looking out for themselves. I just feel sorry for them. <br />
And yes, if they are found out then they should be penalized, but I also believe that Republicans create that image of the chronic parasite to further their argument that those who receive help are lazy and undeserving. Man, that is condescending and hurtful. I have always felt that way. <br />
Also --FYI--the word "charity" is hugely politically incorrect, although I'm sure it doesn't bother you. Just saying--it is offensive. People who are in a situation where they must rely on assistance are often embarrassed to be there, and calling it charity just reinforces a negative connotation that is humiliating in my mind. <br />
I appreciate this dialogue, as I do all political discussion. I joke often, but at the same time, it helps me to clarify my positions. You have certainly helped me here in that respect.<br />
All people work hard for their money, but I must say that those who make minimum wage work just as hard if not harder than those who make huge sums. It is just that the huge earners are rewarded disproportionately. Maybe they deserve it, maybe they don't. But it certainly doesn't make them better people--it just makes them richer. Great for them.

I'm not sore. I rarely get sore. I just like to have a little fun; thank you for providing it for me. <br />
I don't have anything against religion either, that was never the issue. I am just amused that you think that elderly people should appeal to them for help, like begging for alms or something. <br />
I think that in the U.S. we provide the elderly (even those who missed opportunities to make something of themselves and went ahead and got old and sick anyway) with a little more dignity than that. I am proud to live in a country that has a program that looks after them, because despite what you think--opportunity is NOT available to anyone with three dollars in their pocket, and never was. <br />
You neglected to address the uneven playing field question. You revert instead to the "If I can do it and my father and his father before him can do it , than anyone can do it!" --and that is just not true. Try asking a person born with disabilities or dare I say it--someone who is black. <br />
And you are right when you say that the government does not make revenue--it collects it. And while I am sure you have been very successful investing your three dollars, not everyone is as fortunate. <br />
The idea that those who make more than oh...I'll just pick a number out of thin air--$250,000 could afford to shave a little off the top so that we have such a program is not an unreasonable request --ESPECIALLY when you consider that whether we like it or not, each and every one of us is going to be old and possibly sick some day, and that is not an enviable position to be in. It might be nice when you reach a certain age to know that you can slowly deteriorate mentally and physically and know that you will not be forgotten and ignored by the society that you contributed to your whole life.<br />
<br />
And this my friend is where we differ ideologically; I believe that we are all responsible for the "greater 'WE' " as it has come to be called in liberal circles. It is not socialism, but it is an ideology that espouses the "we" factor as opposed to the "I" factor--you know the "I" as in " I give her more than half of what I make." Really? If that is your view of the world and of this country and this society then it is no wonder you are so bitter. I don't see it that way--and she is getting more than half of what I make now too. It is apparent that we will never agree on this. <br />
My outlook on life is different. I do not pit myself against my neighbor, judging them by how much they make or contribute. I figure everyone has their own story, their own life experiences that shape them, and I believe that we are all just doing the best we can. If I thought everyone was out to steal from me the minute I cashed my paycheck I would have to kill myself.<br />
So it is not just politics--it is attitude and life experience. I will gladly give what I can to relieve the suffering of others. I believe that people are basically good and that everyone wants to feel good about themselves, work, make money, create a life for themselves. There are exceptions, of course, but unlike you I believe they are the actual exceptions--not the norm, as is implied in your comment.<br />
And you are also right when you say that my story is more about me than it is about her. I just used her circumstance as an example because it was convenient for me to do so. She is deserving of care and protection in my view, which makes her a good example. There is more to her story--5 children, not able to drive, an absent and abusive husband...but I won't bore you with it. I'm guessing it wouldn't matter. I live to help people like her, and I will always vote for programs that do just that. <br />
See you at the polls.


The corner church for charity! Oh man! I forgot about that! Thank you so much! I will tell her the next time I see her. She is 88 and fiercely independent and prides herself on the fact that she lives within her means to the best of her ability, shutting off the air conditioning and wearing old clothes and cutting coupons --but she still worries. We will grab the walker and head on over to the church on the day that they are giving out clothes and food and money. Excellent! We''ll bring a wagon! I don't know why we didn't think of this. <br />
And I will have a long hard talk with her about all the opportunities that were out there for her that she overlooked or just flat out refused to take advantage of her whole life, because there is nothing more heartwarming to hear in your old age than what you could or should have done differently. I don't know how to thank you for setting us both straight.<br />
And most of all I thank you for reminding me why I need Republicans like you in my life. I am forgetful. I forget, for example that all people are equal--that the playing field is always level in your world and each person, has equal ability and opportunity and if they would just put their ear to the grindstone ( vague Good Will Hunting reference) they would be able to make something of themselves and stop relying on government (and let's not forget all the churches) for their sustenance when they are old and infirm. <br />
Ho...Hum.<br />
Is that all you've got? It's not very original, blaming the have-nots for their circumstances and throwing around percentages (which by the way are constantly changing depending on whose side is throwing the numbers around) that mean nothing. I know all about GE and Exxon and the others, and I know too about the soaring trade deficits (Too bad China owns us--DOH! No wonder they are being so unreasonable!)<br />
I even know a thing or two about what it is actually like to be a small business owner today. It's not easy. If only someone would try and do something about astronomical health care costs...Oh wait...someone did...what was his name again? It was on the tip of my tongue...<br />
Anyway, I will tell my friend that you said thank you for her service, that was kind--and I will also tell her that in the same breath you told her to suck it up and quit looking to the government to bail her out because she is old and sick. I will remind her that that is not what governments do--they are just there to govern and to hell with the people. <br />
That is what you said, right?

Dear Porcpuffer,<br />
EXCELLENT comment. <br />
Not only did you read what I wrote, you responded in a respectful way even though I know you disagree with me ideologically. <br />
The crack about how most middle class recipients aren't "truly needy" is what tipped me off. I zeroed in on that like a heat seeking missle. (Also, as chipper pointed out--comparing us to third world countries is a dead giveaway)<br />
I would argue that we do not even need to confiscate the holdings of billionaires--not necessary (and kind of mean when you think about it). How about we just equitably tax corporations who are making millions of dollars in profits DAILY. Or better yet, how about we close some of the loopholes that let the highest earners pay the least amount of taxes, and see where we stand fiscally then?<br />
Yep, my friend has a roof over her head and she can see a doctor if she so chooses. She has food and heat, and a tv she doesn't watch. It's all good. She counts her pennies (literally), so that she can afford groceries, but that still makes her a ******* queen compared to someone fighting malaria and starvation in Somalia. Good point.<br />
It's just that while we are having this grand discussion about the haves and the have nots in our society I just thought that it was relevant that she served, and she is proud of that service, and she has no clue about the budget debate being waged. She is just sad.<br />
And that makes me sad, because I do have a clue about the debates being waged and I can see what is happening, that they are trading in people's lives to try to insure their re-election campaigns.<br />
It is nauseating. That we can agree on.

Thanks, Quint. I believe in respectful dialog and try to keep my discourse that way. Having a different opinion on an issue doesn't make one either mentally impaired or cognitively deficient (that is, crazy or stupid) as too many tend to claim.

I'm a former liberal, so I understand your viewpoints. That is why I made the comment that situations change. I appreciate and support the goals of social programs. They work well in the context of a strong economy, and when they are initially implemented. But over time 3 things tend to occur with social welfare programs: 1) the programs grow to an extent that they overwhelm the economy supporting them, 2) the economy falters, making it less able to support these programs at current levels, and 3) the beneficiaries list grows from the initially intended recipients to include more and more marginal cases.

That doesn't mean that the programs should end. It means they need reform to accommodate the new reality.

As to taxing corporations and closing loopholes. I have no problem with closing loopholes, they are created by politicians for their contributors and special interest supporters. But increasing corporate taxes is like confiscating high earner incomes and wealthy individual assets. It drives corporate activity to countries with lower tax rates. You'd have to combine that with protectionist trade policies. And that ultimately leads to an insular stagnant economy.

I'm an economist by training. What turned me more conservative is realization that the economy is not a closed system. You can't enact policy in a vacuum, since private sector entities have freedom of action. If you end their freedom, or confiscate the fruits of that action, they will shut down the activities that create the wealth that all society depends upon.

I'm not saying this as a wealthy person. I have a modest income and a family that expects more than I can provide. But I realize even my modest income depends upon others with greater incomes. They aren't necessary "good" or "fair" people, I know many who are anything but. But in their self-interest they play a necessary role in creating opportunities for others.

Quintesse,<br />
I sympathize with your desire to take care of those who truly need help. Your anecdotes are of such examples.<br />
<br />
That does not mean that situations don't change, making it necessary to modify such programs. There is abuse in every system. Programs to help the needy also create dependency and suppress self-initiative. Legal recourse to address discrimination makes employers wary about hiring victim class members. Funding for programs varies with the health of the economy, with demographic trends, and with the relative efficiency of services delivery.<br />
<br />
Social security is long run insolvent. Minor adjustments could make it solvent again, adjusting eligibility for current longevity. It can be means tested, which is just a form of taxation. That doesn't take it away from those who need it.<br />
<br />
Medicare and other health programs are victims of the 3rd party payer problem promoting health care inefficiency. The alternatives are either rationing, which hurts many, including the needy, as practiced in most countries with universal care. Or market oriented approaches to eliminate 3rd party payer. Either approach involves changes. But the status quo is not sustainable.<br />
<br />
Do you know that if you confiscate 100% of the assets of all US billionaires, it wouldn't even cover the deficit for this year? If we tax 100% of the income of everyone earning over $250K it also wouldn't close the gap? If we did so, even Keynesians would acknowledge that the economy would contract, and obligations expand, making these actions counterproductive.<br />
<br />
While higher taxes won't cause economic armmaggedon, as some claim, it also won't solve the fiscal deficit. A combination of compromise in these programs, which, let's face it, mostly benefit middle class people who aren't truly "needy" as per your examples, but just see them as their right, with tax increases is the only reasonable and economically sensible approach. Stories like yours create a lot of sympathy and serve a rhetorical purpose. But these examples don't represent the majority of recipients for the biggest social welfare programs.<br />
<br />
When it comes down to it, even the poorest off Americans are much better off than the average person in many developing countries. US social welfare programs and fiscal spending are largely debates over who has power and who gets support from the most voters. It would be relatively cheap to support the truly needy. But it's expensive to buy the votes of a plurality that puts/keeps a politician in office.

Oy!. to compare with third world countries to legitimize your reasons, is typical..Exactly, is expensive to votes of the congress and senate..Ask the lobbyists, what they pay out to the politicians greed, should be turned over to the people...Have a great day..!

Doing what's right should be the first order of business. I agree. It sounds so simple.<br />
Obama said something recently to the effect of, We, should take the same oath as doctors, <br />
"First, do no harm."<br />
Maybe it is not the almighty dollar so much this time around as it is "We want Obama out" and "we want to get re-elected." <br /> what cost to innocent people? <br />
Thank you for commenting. You sound as angry as I am.

Greed is the biggest bully in the playground. The dirty deals and corruption involving the "ALMIGHTY DOLLAR" is what keeps us from doing the right thing. The light of what's right may never be strong enough to force the shadows of greed into their proper crevices. Thank God we have groups that feed the homeless, the struggling, and the disabled that give outside of the governments boundaries through church drives, school fundraisers, canned good donations, not to mention just taking the time to lend a helping hand or ear. We are all people and we all deserve that respect. It sickens me when the politicians argue about who's right instead of doing what's right.

I am pretty nauseous about the current state of affairs. Maybe only when the checks do not come will reality sink in.<br />
We live in an age where income is measured in millions and billions. My guess is grocery bills do not concern them, the highest earners. Would that they could live a day...<br />
Thank you for your comment. Sorry about your parents. It is hard. I know.

Quintesse, <br />
<br />
I thank you for your eloquent, and most heart felt story.<br />
<br />
I am astounded by the greed, and the outright, hatred, for not just liberals, but, the president, and, the entire basis of our society, that is being spouted, mantra"ed, by the tea party.<br />
<br />
My father says daily, the revolution he has been forewarning about, is gonna happen in his lifetime, on Aug 3rd, and he is 83 now..If we shut down, he and my mother will be moving in with us. He too, served our country.<br />
<br />