Should France Focus on Economy or Social Issues?
Fef
2012/07/13 21:00:00
|
|
|||||
|
235 votes
|
|
75% | |||
|
80 votes
|
|
25% | |||
Some states in America have adopted more liberal views on "amour" than France. Several states in America have legislated same-sex marriage, while France still maintains the tradition of one man and one woman. France has had a national debate about same-sex marriage, and the country overwhelmingly accepts it, but the government has not yet made it legal -- and won't do so until next year.
France has gained a national consensus on transforming traditional marriage, but has not found consensus on economics. The country suffers high unemployment and a struggling economy. Should France focus its national debate on the economy, austerity, taxes and unemployment? Or are social issues more important than that?
REASON.COM reports:
France has gained a national consensus on transforming traditional marriage, but has not found consensus on economics. The country suffers high unemployment and a struggling economy. Should France focus its national debate on the economy, austerity, taxes and unemployment? Or are social issues more important than that?
REASON.COM reports:
The European country you probably assumed was already recognizing gay marriage will actually begin recognizing gay marriage (and allow gay couples to adopt) in 2013.
Read More: http://reason.com/blog/2012/07/13/gay-french-will-...
You have a point. I'm French and I agree that some subway riders do not always smell nice.
But here is where the extreme hypocrisy kicks in-
89% of Conservatives here voted for the economy option- yet still vote their reps into office
whose ONLY contributions the past 2 years have been economy avoiding- social issues.
Because, we need more anti-abortion bills and healthcare repealing efforts.
Since a majority of the American people (anywhere between 57%-75%) do not like the current Healthcare bill and want it repealed, it seems the Senate is the obstructionists
Obviously I am acutely aware of what you deem 'hard to remember'.
It's not hard for me- I included both.
Historically- and by that I mean the past 30 years- not yesterday-
the American people- on both sides- have consistently polled at over 66% percent in FAVOR of a universal healthcare program.
What does the word "current" mean to you? I never said healthcare was not wanted only that it was not wanted in the current form.
Isn't that interesting that a cut in taxes will bring in money as opposed to raising them as every Democrat since then has believed
Your posting about laws going out the window when a recession hits appears to be nonsense. I don't believe either Detroit or New York threw their laws out the window, or even suspended them, in times of economic downturn.
The people who don't care about same sex marriage or equality in the workplace, in my experience, are wealthy Republicans, not people at the bottom of the economy.
It is not at all surprising that reducing marginal tax rates sometimes results in increased government revenue. It does not always, of course.
I guess the cons are relying on the ignorance of their own party- and not aware that most other Americans have memories.
It is called a crime rate and all laws can be passed at the speed of light but if there is noone there to enforce them, they serve no purpose.
When doesn't a tax cut result in more money?
Do you know what today is?
Home schooled maybe?