briancamdudetenger2018
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2023
- Posts
- 2,142
didnt the modern usa conservative era started in the 1960s with buckley
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Pretty much -- it had earlier roots, but it didn't all come together until 1964, when the GOP nominated Goldwater, an ideological conservative very different from Eisenhower.didnt the modern usa conservative era started in the 1960s with buckley
How many people you know have read Buchanan's Death of the West?I don't believe you.
To your first point, conservatives want everyone's taxes lowered. It's good for the economy and people are freer when they get to keep more of what they earn. We've cut taxes 5 times in just over 100 years. Each time, we've had economic growth. And the government winds up with more revenue over time. According to the IRS, the top brackets are paying a higher share of taxes since the 2017 tax cuts than they were before those cuts.
And your second claim is simply wrong. Conservatives oppose government picking winners and losers, whether through subsidies, taxes, or regulation.
That's a lie!Conservatives oppose government picking winners and losers
Pretty much -- it had earlier roots, but it didn't all come together until 1964, when the GOP nominated Goldwater, an ideological conservative very different from Eisenhower.
If you mean this -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Conscience_of_a_Conservative -- Goldwater's ghostwriter was Brent Bozell, Buckley's BIL.barry goldwater and william buckley started it when they made a book about it
If you mean this -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Conscience_of_a_Conservative -- Goldwater's ghostwriter was Brent Bozell, Buckley's BIL.
More inaccuracy. Again, read a little economic history. In a market economy, the only way to get rich is to provide goods and services people want at a price they're willing to pay, and sell a lot of it -- so much that you can employ others to help you produce those goods and services.Pretty damn actually. The reality is nobody hard works there way to that level of income. If you took 90% of every dollar I made over on million dollars in a given year I'm making over one million dollars that year. Lets take a worst case scenario. I stop working. There is NO person in the history of ever that is so valuable that them stopping at that point means nobody can pick up the slack.
Wrong. We have a spending problem.No. We have a revenue problem. To claim otherwise is insanity.
No, we don't -- as we find every time we look at cutting spending, there's nothing in the budget we can really do without, except Defense, which is untouchable. And suspected "waste and fraud" always appears to vanish on close examination.Wrong. We have a spending problem.
It reduced production. We could have produced even more at a lower rate, and less money would be offshored, which means more investment her in the USA.The old tax system, with a 70% top bracket, never discouraged anybody from working.
That's a good place to start. Instead, we pay out money to all sorts of fraudulent operations and projects. That's our money."Reducing improper payments and fraud. Since fiscal year 2003, cumulative improper payment estimates reported by executive branch agencies have totaled about $2.8 trillion. This includes $162 billion for fiscal year 2024. With respect to fraud, GAO estimates that the federal government loses between $233 billion and $521 billion annually, based on data from fiscal years 2018 through 2022. GAO has recommended many actions Congress and the executive branch could take to address improper payments and fraud risks. These include enhancing identity verification through data sharing, restoring fraud-related reporting requirements for agencies, and developing fraud estimates for highly vulnerable programs."
This is an absolute, 100% lie.“Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.”
No, not really. It started more or less in the 1940s and 1950s in opposition to the New Deal, led by Bob Taft. The seminal conservative work, Russell Kirk's The Conservative Mind: From Burke to Eliot, came out in 1953.didnt the modern usa conservative era started in the 1960s with buckley
Without Bob Taft, there wouldn't have been Goldwater. Without Goldwater, there wouldn't have been Reagan.Pretty much -- it had earlier roots, but it didn't all come together until 1964, when the GOP nominated Goldwater, an ideological conservative very different from Eisenhower.
And Karl Hess.If you mean this -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Conscience_of_a_Conservative -- Goldwater's ghostwriter was Brent Bozell, Buckley's BIL.
More elitist falsehoods.At least on paper Conservatives do. The reality conservatives often arent educated. Libs aren't perfect mind you but still.
Your point is?C'mon man. Elon Musk is biggest welfare queen in America
Re immigration: Who (or what) is the real criminal?
https://lawandcrime.com/high-profil...for-transgressions-in-chillingly-brutal-case/
No, your statement is a lie. It's what liberals do all the time. Conservatives oppose that.That's a lie!
There are massive amounts of stuff we can do without. We can do without at least 90% of it. Even in defense (as long as we don't inhibit readiness.)No, we don't -- as we find every time we look at cutting spending, there's nothing in the budget we can really do without, except Defense, which is untouchable. And suspected "waste and fraud" always appears to vanish on close examination.
Republican administrations pick winners and losers just as much.No, your statement is a lie. It's what liberals do all the time. Conservatives oppose that.
No, YOU can. But SOMEBODY'S ox is always gored by a cut -- and they ain't welfare queens, either.There are massive amounts of stuff we can do without. We can do without at least 90% of it.