Skip to main content

View Diary: Breaking: A Very Good Quinnipiac Poll for Obama and Democrats (69 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  That contention is not back up by (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Voter123, ybruti, MKinTN, ManhattanMan

    facts - the overwhelming majority of Americans, almost all of them in fact, use government social programs of one type or another:

    When asked about participating in specific government social programs, 97 percent of Republicans and 98 percent of Democrats say they have taken part in a government program of some kind, according to a 2008 survey run by the Cornell Survey Research Institute. Not just one or two either; the survey found that people had used around five social policies on average.
    link
    •  Many are in denial about this (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Roadbed Guy, MKinTN, ManhattanMan

      Some acknowledge it, but nevertheless hate it, or at least claim to. Deep down most Americans, at least in theory, believe in self-reliance. Which I think is a good thing, provided you realize that to be "self-reliant", you need others, be they family, friends, companies, or government. The sort of self-reliance that continues to be promoted in the US, especially by the right, is an 18th century backwoods sort of self-reliance that no longer obtains (and even then these people relied on guns, gunpowder, supplies, clothes, etc., that were made by others).

      To permanently win back a majority of Americans, Dems have to find a way to incorporate the cult of self-reliance into their progressive message. Something along the lines of it being government's job to make it possible for people to be self-reliant and have a decent life with self-respect--something the GOP has been increasingly denying them for decades, belying its message.

      "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

      by kovie on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 06:16:11 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Self reliance is a total myth, but whatever, (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        kovie, MKinTN, billlaurelMD

        if it wins elections, why not propagate the meme?

        More to the point I was getting at, I was disputing the statement that "many people do not feel that is the role of Government to improve their standard of living"

        I suspect that very few people actually feel that way when push comes to shove, as the stats I posted well exemplify.  What they in fact feel is that it is not the role of Government to improve other people's standard of living - especially when those other people happen to minorities, etc.

        •  Well, sure (5+ / 0-)

          When other people get government aid, it's a handout for layabouts. When I get it, it's something I earned and deserve. A bit OT, but I hear a variation on this whenever I come across a discussion in the comments section of an article about cycling and cycling accidents. There's always a contingent of nasty bike haters who claim that cyclists should have to pay road usage fees through tabs and licensing or else not be allowed on roads, not realizing that the vast majority of cyclists also own cars and pay such fees already, and that the extra use they get out of roads on their bikes is marginal compared to that of cars, in terms of space and wear and tear. I.e. my use of public roads is legitimate because I drive a real vehicle and not some effete bicycle, whereas your use of them is bogus.

          You just can't cure stupid. Or mean.

          "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

          by kovie on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 06:45:54 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Maybe you can come up with a concrete proposal (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            kovie, MKinTN

            for cyclists to pay their fair share of road costs based on the amount of wear and tear that results from their activities, you know, in comparison to SUVs, 18 wheelers, etc.

            Like you say, it's rather minimal - wonder if it can actually be quantified?   I'd bet it'd be something like one cent for every hundred dollars for the mega vehicles now roaming our roads . . ..

            •  Not even (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Roadbed Guy, MKinTN

              My bike weighs under 19 pounds and has 2 skinny slick tire wheels and makes infinitessimally small wear and tear on roads. A typical vehicle probably weighs around 3-4000 pounds and measurably wears down roads. But if I'm asked to pay a penny or two to register my bike, I'm ok with that.

              Of course, the cost of administering such a rediculous program would vastly exceed the additional revenue it brought in. Wingnut math is like that.

              "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

              by kovie on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 07:04:49 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  To nitpick, I'm guessing that your bike (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                kovie

                weighs more than 19 pounds with you on it?

                In any event, the point is for you to appear eager to "pay your fair share" when confronted by a wingnut.

                And you can even cite scientific studies - such as this thread (I'm sure it would meet their standards, if copied and pasted to a RW site of some type) - that you owe something like $0.0137 over the lifetime of a bicycle, and propose that it be collected like sales tax when the bicycle is sold.  

                That would put them in quite the conundrum I suspect - they'd be forced to agree with a new tax, or look like a complete hypocrite for bringing up the subject in the first place . .. .

                •  I weigh exactly 3.123 ounces (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Roadbed Guy

                  But seriously, even with fat old me on the bike I can't imagine that it contributes measurable deterioration to a roadbed (heh) even if I go over the same stretch of road 10 times a day 365 days a year. If I'm wrong, I'd love to see credible studies showing otherwise.

                  Of course, there's more involved than roadbed deterioration. There's also services such as police, rescue, EMS, etc., in case I get into an accident or need help on some remote road, that car fees pay for. So throw in another $3 a year and I'll consider it a fair trade.

                  Oh wait, what's that, it would likely cost well more than $3 a year to administer and thus is pointless? Damn that reality and math, always getting in the way of a good wingnut rant!

                  Seriously, they just hate cyclists, or anyone who makes them feel like the losers that deep down they know they are.

                  "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

                  by kovie on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 02:28:19 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

        •  No, they believe it about... (0+ / 0-)

          ...themselves, too.

          That is why you get many people (notably poor Whites in red states) who knowingly vote against their own economic self-interest.

    •  The Conservative Mentality Is That Far Too Much (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Roadbed Guy, MKinTN

      is wasted on thosssse people and that (waves hands) cuts won't cut mine.

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 06:19:49 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  You are correct. (0+ / 0-)

      The fact that the attitude of millions of people contradicts the facts is what makes this so frustrating!

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site