PDA

View Full Version : America's Best Days: 68% Prefer a Government with Fewer Services, Lower Taxes



megimoo
01-22-2011, 12:39 PM
House Republicans are proposing to follow their repeal of the national health care bill with billions in spending cuts, and most voters continue to favor a government that offers fewer services and lower taxes.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 68% of Likely Voters prefer a government with fewer services and lower taxes rather than a more active one with more services and higher taxes. This is virtually identical to last month and consistent with findings since September. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/questions/pt_survey_questions/january_2011/questions_benchmarks_january_17_18_2011
snip
Twenty-two percent (22%) of voters say they prefer a government with more services and higher taxes, down three points from December. Support for a more activist government over the past four years has ranged from 19% in August 2009 to 32% in late July 2007.


http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/america_s_best_days

NJCardFan
01-22-2011, 06:27 PM
Doesn't seem to jibe with wee wee's assertion that 36% like socialism does it?

Apache
01-22-2011, 06:37 PM
Doesn't seem to jibe with wee wee's assertion that 36% like socialism does it?

You mean he lied?

Madisonian
01-22-2011, 06:37 PM
And what are these nebulous "services" they are willing to do without.
I would about bet that they aren't considering cuts in the ones they use themselves.

lacarnut
01-22-2011, 06:39 PM
Doesn't seem to jibe with wee wee's assertion that 36% like socialism does it?

Wee Wee is pee peeing on himself with this news.

Novaheart
01-22-2011, 06:46 PM
Doesn't seem to jibe with wee wee's assertion that 36% like socialism does it?

From what one hears, Americans prefer a smaller government with fewer programs which only benefit others. They naturally consider the ones that benefit them to be their due. You know the kind, the ones who think that their pension and their lifetime medical benefits were earned, but that everyone else was too stupid/lazy/unpatriotic to get a job with government paycheck.

lacarnut
01-22-2011, 07:01 PM
From what one hears, Americans prefer a smaller government with fewer programs which only benefit others. They naturally consider the ones that benefit them to be their due. You know the kind, the ones who think that their pension and their lifetime medical benefits were earned, but that everyone else was too stupid/lazy/unpatriotic to get a job with government paycheck.

Wrong, asshole. If you pay for a benefit, you are due it. What Americans do not want is those that are too lazy or stupid to be rewarded with benefits that they did not earn. Other than benefits for the sick and elderly, welfare payments, housing, food, SSI, WIC, etc should be eliminated.

NJCardFan
01-22-2011, 07:19 PM
From what one hears, Americans prefer a smaller government with fewer programs which only benefit others. They naturally consider the ones that benefit them to be their due. You know the kind, the ones who think that their pension and their lifetime medical benefits were earned, but that everyone else was too stupid/lazy/unpatriotic to get a job with government paycheck.
Speaking as a state government worker, you're not entirely wrong, but speaking for myself, I pay a lot toward my pension as well as my medical benefits($120 per month, you?). And I don't mind. But something you're obviously leaving out on purpose. People like me actually earn what we have, state pay or not. People on welfare earn not one penny. Big difference.

Novaheart
01-22-2011, 08:23 PM
Wrong, asshole. If you pay for a benefit, you are due it. What Americans do not want is those that are too lazy or stupid to be rewarded with benefits that they did not earn. Other than benefits for the sick and elderly, welfare payments, housing, food, SSI, WIC, etc should be eliminated.

So if you own a store where EBT is a significant portion of sales, and people on your staff are receiving EBT, Section 8, and medicaid benefits are you on welfare?

Rockntractor
01-22-2011, 08:29 PM
So if you own a store where EBT is a significant portion of sales, and people on your staff are receiving EBT, Section 8, and medicaid benefits are you on welfare?

http://i686.photobucket.com/albums/vv230/upyourstruly/9qoFGWbygh8yop21yPN5Sc6Oo1_400.jpg

Lanie
01-22-2011, 11:19 PM
I have a really weird idea. How about a government that uses the money it has more efficiently so it can provide more services without raising taxes that much (actually, taxes might get lower)?

Lanie
01-22-2011, 11:21 PM
And what are these nebulous "services" they are willing to do without.
I would about bet that they aren't considering cuts in the ones they use themselves.

Of course not. One thing I've discovered is that some of the people making the "lazy people not wanting to work" accusation are actually people using some of the services themselves. Oops!!!!

Rockntractor
01-22-2011, 11:24 PM
I have a really weird idea. How about a government that uses the money it has more efficiently so it can provide more services without raising taxes that much (actually, taxes might get lower)?

Hi Lanie, long time no see. The government never will be efficient doing things it wasn't designed for in the first place. They would be best off sticking to the dictates of the Constitution rather than providing services they have no business providing.

lacarnut
01-22-2011, 11:33 PM
Of course not. One thing I've discovered is that some of the people making the "lazy people not wanting to work" accusation are actually people using some of the services themselves. Oops!!!!

What are these services you speak of in the US.

I have a better idea. Lower taxes with less services.

PoliCon
01-22-2011, 11:35 PM
I have a really weird idea. How about a government that uses the money it has more efficiently so it can provide more services without raising taxes that much (actually, taxes might get lower)?

The most effective government for doing what you speak of is the local government. If people on a local level want to provide those services - let em. But the federal government has no business at all being involved in any way.

Lanie
01-23-2011, 12:24 AM
Hi Lanie, long time no see. The government never will be efficient doing things it wasn't designed for in the first place. They would be best off sticking to the dictates of the Constitution rather than providing services they have no business providing.

So the government is unable to come up with a budget? Why?

Lanie
01-23-2011, 12:25 AM
What are these services you speak of in the US.

I have a better idea. Lower taxes with less services.

Well, the woman I was speaking to a couple of weeks ago put down those on I guess welfare. Meanwhile, she had Medicaid for her daughter and tried to get it for herself. She might have been on food stamps as well. She felt she couldn't do it all on a CNA paycheck (working toward becoming a nurse).

Lanie
01-23-2011, 12:27 AM
The most effective government for doing what you speak of is the local government. If people on a local level want to provide those services - let em. But the federal government has no business at all being involved in any way.


My state government has been pretty crooked with the money. I don't think keeping the federal government out of things would help the people here.

While local governments do understand the needs of their people better than the federal government does, what we need even more are people who are HONEST and people who know how to effectively budget.

Rockntractor
01-23-2011, 12:29 AM
So the government is unable to come up with a budget? Why?

See post 18.

lacarnut
01-23-2011, 12:43 AM
Well, the woman I was speaking to a couple of weeks ago put down those on I guess welfare. Meanwhile, she had Medicaid for her daughter and tried to get it for herself. She might have been on food stamps as well. She felt she couldn't do it all on a CNA paycheck (working toward becoming a nurse).

Sounds like the typical trash that expects the government to take care of them. Where is the daddy in this situation? If she can not afford to support herself, give the child up for adoption so that someone with financial support can or get a second job. You have heard of that, huh. I do not want my taxes to go to these kind of slackers.

NJCardFan
01-23-2011, 01:07 AM
So if you own a store where EBT is a significant portion of sales, and people on your staff are receiving EBT, Section 8, and medicaid benefits are you on welfare?
*sigh* OK, please justify taking by force from someone who actually worked for something and giving it to someone who's only life's ambition is to sit on their lazy ass.

PoliCon
01-23-2011, 08:56 AM
My state government has been pretty crooked with the money. I don't think keeping the federal government out of things would help the people here.

While local governments do understand the needs of their people better than the federal government does, what we need even more are people who are HONEST and people who know how to effectively budget.

You get what you elect. If you have a problem with crooked people in government - you have to do your duty and speak out and make sure that good people get elected. But I do understand what you speak of. My town is a one party town and without a opposition to speak of - they tend to wallow in corruption.

PoliCon
01-23-2011, 08:59 AM
*sigh* OK, please justify taking by force from someone who actually worked for something and giving it to someone who's only life's ambition is to sit on their lazy ass.

which is why it is time to eliminate welfare and institute workfare. There are plenty of menial jobs that municipalities need to get done - jobs that union workers now do for 3 times the pay rate the job deserves. So can the union workers and get workfare people in there doing those cleaning and maintenance jobs.

Madisonian
01-23-2011, 09:10 AM
I would prefer a federal government that did not think that the they have the right to meddle in or finance things like food safety, occupational safety, automobile safety, transportation safety, economic safety, or anything else that should be the responsibility of local government or can be done by the market.

Social Security should be phased out and until it is, only those that paid into the system should get any benefit from it.
Anything else that is or can be termed as an entitlement should be eliminated. Nobody, myself included, is entitled to anything that another must pay for through governmental theft enforced at the point of a gun.

Think 68% of the people agree with much of that?