Michael Ramirez by Michael Ramirez

Michael Ramirez

Comments (44) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. Jeff T

    Jeff T said, over 1 year ago

    And the goal of Republicans is to concentrate the wealth in the hands of a few, the rest of us be damned.

    They’re both good at their jobs, and we’re all getting screwed either way.

  2. cjkinsey

    cjkinsey said, over 1 year ago

    Until this comic strip is putting up details of global climate change, any concern about future generations are a fraud.

  3. Chillbilly

    Chillbilly said, over 1 year ago

    Without the debt, he’s just another third world kid with no education and no rights, living in a land of vast poverty, ignored by a handful of greedy, rich people.

  4. Harleyquinn

    Harleyquinn GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    @cjkinsey

    So having a budget is not as important as defrauding the government with magic green scams? Answer me this, the USA is but 1 country. how are we to effect the future if man made scary thing is real, but if it is real Asia does ten times the damage as we do?

  5. pdchapin

    pdchapin said, over 1 year ago

    I’d rather inherit a big debt and have a good education and a viable infrastructure than to be debt-free, ignorant and living in a country that’s falling apart.

    Of course, if we raised revenue we could leave them educated, debt-free and with a viable infrastructure.

  6. Wraithkin

    Wraithkin said, over 1 year ago

    @pdchapin

    You mean like the $600-billion revenue increase we just had? Are you willing to sacrifice half of what you earn to pay for other people to not work? Are you willing to all half your income to be stolen in order to provide benefits to those who have no legal right to them? How about giving up half your resources to pay for those who failed to plan properly for retirement?

    This isn’t about trying to screw “the little people,” Because I’m one of those “little people.” This is about this country maintaining its meritocracy form of advancement, instead of it becoming the socialist state that we are slowly moving towards, where mediocrity is encouraged. Look at the symptoms:
    - If you are successful (rich), you are vilified.
    - If you are successful, no matter how much you pay, you will always need to pay more of your “fair share.”
    - If you are a successful business (i.e. you make a decent profit), you are evil and need to pay for other people’s benefits (see the PPACA).
    - If you are poor, you are going to get enough assistance to make roughly $9/hour. Yes, that’s how much people make on unemployment/food stamps/etc.
    - If you are poor, it’s the fault of someone being successful.
    - If you were fired or laid off, it’s the big bad business’ fault, not your own.
    - If you are against unions, you hate the “little people.”
    - If you are against minimum wage, you want to keep people destitute.

    These are all symptoms of one very fundamental flaw with the Democratic Party right now: They no longer believe in equality of opportunity. They believe in equality of outcome. The government is to protect you from predatory practices of businesses and other people, but it is not to guarantee you are going to be successful in life.

    Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That doesn’t mean you get it. In all things in life, there are winners, and there are losers. If there is no consequence in losing, what incentive do you have to win? Where’s the drive to achieve better? Where’s the desire to leave a better legacy for your kids than what you had?

    Wake up, people. We are slowly being turned into cattle, prime for the milking by the government. And the worst part about this? Nearly half the country seems to be okay with it, as long as they get their freebies. Too bad Margaret Thacher is going to be right: Eventually you run out of other people’s money. And what will we do when the well runs dry?

  7. disgustedtaxpayer

    disgustedtaxpayer said, over 1 year ago

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/proposed-dem-budget-increases-spending-62-over-next-decade_707579.html

    the President’s budget was legally due the first of February.
    the Democrat Senate budget (missing the last 4 years) is released by the Dem.Chair of the Budget Committee….
    the url above is an analysis article of 10 years of Democrat’s spending plans….annual increases from FY 2013 $3.6 Trillion to FY 2023 $5.7 Trillion….
    an increase of spending of 62% between the 2013 total and the 2023 total. This article does not compute the INCREASE IN THE DEBT, or give the annual deficit estimates.
    -
    IMO America cannot afford the Democrat budgets.
    -
    (and I was complaining that Ryan’s Budget allowed a 3.4% increase! I believe the GOP must recalculate for annual DECREASES in spending)

  8. d_legendary1 Demands Dr.C and Martens Release

    d_legendary1 Demands Dr.C and Martens Release said, over 1 year ago

    When Dems are in charge: Scream about the debt because its the biggest problem we have. Won’t someone think of the children?


    When Republicans are in charge: What debt?

  9. locoboilerguy

    locoboilerguy said, over 1 year ago

    Wouldn’t it be fun to just tear the whole thing down and start over again.

  10. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    @d_legendary1 Demands Dr.C and Martens Release

    Dude this is just a cop out on your part. Does it matter that someone else does something wrong before you? Yes it does. Does it make it an acceptable practice for you when you are in charge? No, it does not.

    And it only confirms the idea that democrats are just as complicit in the bankrupting of America as republicans.

    So when can we expect the power in charge to do something about the debt? You certainly can’t be serious if your “budget” plan adds a 62% increase in spending over the next 10 years. Shoot, you can’t be serious until your budget plan eliminates deficit spending period.

    Why is it that you can’t see that truth?

  11. Kylie2112

    Kylie2112 said, over 1 year ago

    @ScottPM

    http://www.cracked.com/blog/4-things-politicians-will-never-understand-about-poor-people/
    -
    91% of people on federal assistance a. work, b. are elderly, or c. are disabled. 66% of children living in poverty have at least one working parent. 84% of people living in poverty have at least one working member in their household. Facts cited in the article.
    -
    Also, the vast majority of charities can’t even handle what is donated to them well enough. It takes a higher overhead to run a good, large-scale charity. Do some research on inner city food banks and how much work goes into actually getting things done.

  12. Harleyquinn

    Harleyquinn GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    @locoboilerguy

    locoboilerguy said, 13 minutes ago
    Wouldn’t it be fun to just tear the whole thing down and start over again."

    Fair Tax! 9 9 9! Flat tax! is what I want!

  13. Wraithkin

    Wraithkin said, over 1 year ago

    @Kylie2112

    Those are some good statistics. Here’s the problem with some of them…

    Of those elderly, how many of them actually planned for their retirement, or did they expect Social Security and their house to be their retirement vehicle? How many of them invested in 401(k)‘s or Roth IRA’s? How many of them created diversified accounts, Municipal Bonds, or other money market funds that would have helped absorb some of the lost funds when the stock market took a digger? I have a grandfather whose entire retirement plan revolved around a paid-off house, Social Security, and his crappy pension from the Teamsters (who screwed him big time).

    How many of those who work and are on assistance are being told by their social workers to not earn more than xyz dollars or they lose their benefits? I’ve got personal experience with people who are told just that. My wife had a co-worker who was a single mom who was busting her rump to get her doing well at the job she was at, and was receiving minimal assistance from the state. You know what the social worker told her? “Quit your job and have another baby so you can get more assistance.” If that doesn’t appall you, there is something wrong with your brain housing group.

    Of those who are disabled, how many are disabled and how many are “disabled?” I rate 40% disability with the VA thanks to my time with the Marines. But I still work full time and carry on a job. Many people who lost their unemployment benefits applied for SS Disability, and were given it because there’s no filter. You get a doctor to sign off on your “disability” and bam, you get life-long disability payments from Uncle Sam. We have seen the roles on SS Disability spike in this recession. This isn’t because we have had more people suffer horrendous injuries or debilitating diseases. It’s because people use it as another vehicle for unemployment. It’s skewing the numbers of the truly disabled.

    Of those 66% you mention, how many of them have only one parent in the house? Statistically, many of the poverty-stricken are minorities, and primarily black. Illegitimacy amongst the black community is something like 70%. And unemployment in the black community is in the 20’s, iirc. Raising a child is difficult. Raising a child alone is more difficult. Raising a child alone with those odds against you: That’s damn-near impossible. And the problem is that it’s a self-perpetuating cycle. It generates a new social norm for those children that makes it harder to pull yourself up into the ranks of the middle or upper class.

    You move on to the 84% of people in poverty have at least one person in the household working, and I could see that. And of those 84%, how many are working minimum wage jobs because that’s what they’re being told to do? How many are working for cash to keep it hidden from the government so they keep their bennies? And how many are also families of the above-mentioned 66%?

    Poverty is no joke. It’s nothing to discard or dismiss. But the statistics you cite have humongous holes in them, and only tell specific stories. They don’t tell the whole, ugly side of the truth. Many people are being told to stay down in the “poverty” level by their social workers to reap more benefits from the government. That’s happening, and that’s not what those programs are for. And that’s why I am so angry. I’m all for helping the needy, and giving a hand to those who will take it. But I am not for subsidizing laziness, which is what’s going on now.

    I’ll finish my novel with an interesting statistic of my own. For women, if you finish high school, get a job, and get married before having children, you are 95% likely to never fall into the poverty zone of income. True story. Makes one wonder why women aren’t doing this.

  14. mickey1339

    mickey1339 GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    This brings to mind a quote on Democracy:



    “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years.”
    ― Alexis de Tocqueville

  15. DavidGBA

    DavidGBA said, over 1 year ago

    Take pity on us whose savings are inflationed away, not the kids who pay our debt with inflated dollars.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (29).